Hillel or Shammai?

Pavel Mosko

Arch-Dude of the Apostolic
Site Supporter
Oct 4, 2016
7,236
7,313
56
Boyertown, PA.
✟768,605.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Posting this thread inspired by a Messianic Jewish rabbi friend. Over the years, in reading about NT era Judaism and the two big sages, most everything I've read is sympathetic towards Hillel as the "spirit of the Law" guy. There are a few notable exceptions where Shammai wins out, but for the most part that is the case. Talking to my friend on the phone a month or so ago, he had the opposite view siding with Shammai and claiming Hillel's followers sand bagged the school of Shammai. Anyway, how common is this sort of view? While I have a lot of respect for my friend, on this view, I am deeply skeptical for many reasons...
 

yeshuaslavejeff

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Jan 6, 2005
39,944
11,098
okie
✟214,996.00
Faith
Anabaptist
I think if a statement is made by Hillel, and it is in harmony with TORAH, then agree with it.
And if a statement is made by Shammai, and it is in harmony with TORAH, then agree with it.
(same, of course, with any statement by anyone, even the Apostles , as they said in the NT)
 
Upvote 0

visionary

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.
Site Supporter
Mar 25, 2004
56,925
8,040
✟575,802.44
Faith
Messianic
Posting this thread inspired by a Messianic Jewish rabbi friend. Over the years, in reading about NT era Judaism and the two big sages, most everything I've read is sympathetic towards Hillel as the "spirit of the Law" guy. There are a few notable exceptions where Shammai wins out, but for the most part that is the case. Talking to my friend on the phone a month or so ago, he had the opposite view siding with Shammai and claiming Hillel's followers sand bagged the school of Shammai. Anyway, how common is this sort of view? While I have a lot of respect for my friend, on this view, I am deeply skeptical for many reasons...
If this is any indication of the direction Shammai was taking with his disciples, it wasn't good. Yeshua stated that those who were not lifting a finger while piling on the work, were no help to the faithful. Shammai was an impatient and angry man according to some scholars. Shammai can be linked to the Pharisees which Yeshua called vipers.

On the other hand, there are quite a few parallels between the way Hillel was thinking and preaching and that which Yeshua was saying.
 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
Rabbi Gamaliel was a student of Rabbi Hillel and Saul/Paul was a student of Rabbi Gamaliel. Rabbi Gamaliel even defended the Apostles before the Sanhedrin. The Pharisees were certainly not all bad guys.
 
Upvote 0

Pavel Mosko

Arch-Dude of the Apostolic
Site Supporter
Oct 4, 2016
7,236
7,313
56
Boyertown, PA.
✟768,605.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
If this is any indication of the direction Shammai was taking with his disciples, it wasn't good. Yeshua stated that those who were not lifting a finger while piling on the work, were no help to the faithful. Shammai was an impatient and angry man according to some scholars. Shammai can be linked to the Pharisees which Yeshua called vipers.

On the other hand, there are quite a few parallels between the way Hillel was thinking and preaching and that which Yeshua was saying.

Yes that is my general take. The followers of Shammai and there "philosophy of ministry" so to speak would be problematic for early Christianity when it came to the Judaizer type conflicts written about in the Book of Acts, and the epistles.


"...This attitude caused Pharisees from the school of Shammai to hate all Gentiles, and left them with little regard even for Jews who didn’t follow them. In the days of Shammai, so passionate was their hatred of Gentiles that around 10 AD, Shammai passed 18 edicts specifically meant to force separation between Jews and Gentiles. The specifics of all these edicts have been lost, but among them was a prohibition of entering the house of a Gentile lest a Jew thereby become defiled, and even eating with or purchasing food from a Gentile was forbidden.


The School of Shammai, meanwhile, took a major hit when the revolt of AD 66-70 failed, and when a “heavenly voice” in AD 70 was supposedly heard in Yavneh instructing the Jews to follow the rulings of Hillel over Shammai."

Say yes or no
 
Upvote 0

Pavel Mosko

Arch-Dude of the Apostolic
Site Supporter
Oct 4, 2016
7,236
7,313
56
Boyertown, PA.
✟768,605.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Rabbi Gamaliel was a student of Rabbi Hillel and Saul/Paul was a student of Rabbi Gamaliel. Rabbi Gamaliel even defended the Apostles before the Sanhedrin. The Pharisees were certainly not all bad guys.

Agreed this entire discussion actually came up because I was talking about a former thread to that affect that you participated in.

Deconstructing the Pharisees


And I found that not only did my friend agree with my premise (That the Pharisees weren't the villains of melodrama that folks usually assume or portray them as, but he actually went one big step farther, saying the side that is usually considered the most problematic were actually the Good guys so to speak, pretty much up ending most everything I've known that has been written about that area by contemporary historians, Josephus, modern Jewish writers, the Talmud etc.).
 
Upvote 0

visionary

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.
Site Supporter
Mar 25, 2004
56,925
8,040
✟575,802.44
Faith
Messianic
….

The School of Shammai, meanwhile, took a major hit when the revolt of AD 66-70 failed, and when a “heavenly voice” in AD 70 was supposedly heard in Yavneh instructing the Jews to follow the rulings of Hillel over Shammai."

Say yes or no
Interesting, a heavenly voice in 70 AD instructs Hillel is to be followed. I haven't heard of this. Do you have the source for this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: pinacled
Upvote 0

Pavel Mosko

Arch-Dude of the Apostolic
Site Supporter
Oct 4, 2016
7,236
7,313
56
Boyertown, PA.
✟768,605.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Interesting, a heavenly voice in 70 AD instructs Hillel is to be followed. I haven't heard of this. Do you have the source for this?

The source I believe comes from a passage in the Mishna, the early part of the Talmud.


Eruvin 13b:10-11
For three years, the House of Hillel and the House of Shammai argued. One said, 'The halakha (law) is according to our position,' and the other said, 'The halakha is according to our position.' A heavenly voice spoke: "These and those are the words of the living God, and the halakha is according to the House of Hillel." A question was raised: Since the heavenly voice declared: "Both these and those are the words of the Living God," why was the halacha established to follow the opinion of Hillel? It is because the students of Hillel were kind and gracious. They taught their own ideas as well as the ideas from the students of Shammai. Furthermore, they even taught Shammai's opinions first


Sefaria Source Sheet: Hillel vs Shammai


Bat Kol - A Divine Voice | My Jewish Learning
 
Upvote 0

pinacled

walking with the Shekinah
Apr 29, 2015
3,311
1,007
United states
✟171,798.77
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
The source I believe comes from a passage in the Mishna, the early part of the Talmud.


Eruvin 13b:10-11
For three years, the House of Hillel and the House of Shammai argued. One said, 'The halakha (law) is according to our position,' and the other said, 'The halakha is according to our position.' A heavenly voice spoke: "These and those are the words of the living God, and the halakha is according to the House of Hillel." A question was raised: Since the heavenly voice declared: "Both these and those are the words of the Living God," why was the halacha established to follow the opinion of Hillel? It is because the students of Hillel were kind and gracious. They taught their own ideas as well as the ideas from the students of Shammai. Furthermore, they even taught Shammai's opinions first


Sefaria Source Sheet: Hillel vs Shammai


Bat Kol - A Divine Voice | My Jewish Learning
A calendrical debate in essence of principle.
The very debate ole sh'aul addressed concerning new and full moons upon the 4th yom(day)and 7th yr.
The talmud only gives credence to debate of when to celebrate Shavuot Shalom.

There are few school of thought that know better than to argue such vanity.
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Rabbi Gamaliel was a student of Rabbi Hillel and Saul/Paul was a student of Rabbi Gamaliel. Rabbi Gamaliel even defended the Apostles before the Sanhedrin. The Pharisees were certainly not all bad guys.
Actually, R Gamaliel was Hillel's grandson.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

pinacled

walking with the Shekinah
Apr 29, 2015
3,311
1,007
United states
✟171,798.77
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Ellequence in speech with foremost humility .. In following a lamed in a strength of forgiveness while walking in prayer.
There are few that find a hidden generational treasure such as ole sh'aul(Paul).

2 corinthians 11:6
 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
Even so,
Hillel has a name attributed to a calendrical falsehood.

Could you explain? All calendars are arbitrary so it would be difficult to claim that one was better than another.
 
Upvote 0

visionary

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.
Site Supporter
Mar 25, 2004
56,925
8,040
✟575,802.44
Faith
Messianic
Could you explain? All calendars are arbitrary so it would be difficult to claim that one was better than another.
There is the Lord's calendar, and while many claim to be doing God a favor by, for this reason or that, create a calendar they can control. God, in His infinite wisdom, based His calendar on the signs of the heavens, whether it be the sun or moon.
Genesis 1:14
And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
There is the Lord's calendar, and while many claim to be doing God a favor by, for this reason or that, create a calendar they can control. God, in His infinite wisdom, based His calendar on the signs of the heavens, whether it be the sun or moon.
Genesis 1:14
And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

And using those signs any number of calendars have been arbitrarily devised. The Hebrew/Jews alone devised several of them as has Christianity.

Dionysius Exiguus - Westar Institute

Dionysius Exigius (aka Dennis the Short), a monk from Russia who died about 544, was asked by Pope John I to set out the dates for Easter from the years 527 to 626. It seems that the Pope was keen to produce some order in the celebration of Easter. Dionysius decided to begin with what he considered to be the year of Jesus' birth. He chose the year in which Rome had been founded and determined, from the evidence known to him, that Jesus had been born 753 years later. He did have an error in that because one emperor changed his name during his reign, Dionysius counted him twice.

He was almost certainly acquainted with a suggestion by Hippolytus (170–236) that the date of Jesus' birth was December 25, but the trouble was that Hippolytus had not backed up this claim with sound arguments. Dionysius, however, had just the argument: His contemporaries claimed that God created the earth on March 25. It was inconceivable that the son of God could have been in any way imperfect. Therefore Jesus must have been conceived on March 25. This meant that he must have been born nine months later—December 25. Dionysius also concluded that, as a perfect being, Jesus could not have lived an incomplete life so he must have died on March 25 as well!

December 25 was an auspicious choice. In 274, in Rome, the Emperor Aurelian declared December 25 a civic holiday in celebration of the birth of Mithras, the sun god. By 336, in that same city, Christians countered by celebrating the birth of Jesus, the son of God, on December 25. Christians in Antioch in 375 celebrated the birth of Jesus on January 6. Christians in Alexandria did not begin to celebrate Christmas at all until 430. So until Dionysius came along there was confusion over dates, and debates raged, even over the usefulness of celebrating the birth of Jesus at all. What had been universally important for all Christians—the pre-eminent event—was the celebration of Easter.

When, in 527, he formalized the date of Jesus' birth, Dionysius put Christmas on the map. Jesus was born, he declared, on December 25 in the Roman year 753. Dionysius then suspended time for a few days, declaring January 1, 754—New Year's day in Rome—as the first year in a new era of world history.

With a stroke of ingenuity Dionysius had managed to shift the attention of the church from Easter to Christmas. From this point in time it seemed only logical to celebrate the birth of Jesus before his death. If Jesus' death by crucifixion had made possible salvation for all people everywhere, so the argument went, then his birth was the sign that God was identifying with human kind by taking human form.

But Dionysius made a mistake in his calculations. Perhaps he had never read the gospel account of the birth of Jesus. In Matthew Jesus is said to have been born while Herod was still King (2:1). That would translate into 4 BC (or even earlier) according to the calculations of Dionysius. As a consequence, for Christians the year 2000 is not two thousand years after the birth of Jesus, but more like 2004.

That was not his only mistake. Dionysius followed the convention of his times and, as the Roman calendar moved from the year 753 to 754, he called the latter "year one" of the New World order—anno domini, the year of our Lord. The concept of naught (zero) didn't come into Europe from Arabia and India until about two hundred years later. As a result, centuries end with naught and begin with the digit one. So for us the year 2000 was the end of one millennium but it was not the beginning of the next: that occurred in 2001.

Later, when Pope Gregory tidied up the calendar on 24 February 1582, the calendar lost eleven days. To synchronise the calendar of Dionysius with the movement of the sun, October 4 became October 15, and to avoid having to make further adjustments a leap year was introduced. Pope Gregory must also have known of the mistakes made by Dionysius but all he did was to confirm them, perhaps hoping that no one would notice.

There is one other problem. Bishop Ussher (1581–1656) worked out the precise year of creation as 4004 BC (he knew about Dionysisus getting the date of Jesus birth wrong). But he also advanced the view that the earth had a total life span of six thousand years. In order to come up with this conclusion he based his calculations on all the generations mentioned in the Bible.


In reality we do not know when Jesus was born—neither the year, the month, nor the day. The chronology of our western calendar is based on mythology masquerading as theology. We do well to treat it all with the humour it deserves.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

visionary

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.
Site Supporter
Mar 25, 2004
56,925
8,040
✟575,802.44
Faith
Messianic
And using those signs any number of calendars have been arbitrarily devised. The Hebrew/Jews alone devised several of them as has Christianity.

Dionysius Exiguus - Westar Institute

Dionysius Exigius (aka Dennis the Short), a monk from Russia who died about 544, was asked by Pope John I to set out the dates for Easter from the years 527 to 626. It seems that the Pope was keen to produce some order in the celebration of Easter. Dionysius decided to begin with what he considered to be the year of Jesus' birth. He chose the year in which Rome had been founded and determined, from the evidence known to him, that Jesus had been born 753 years later. He did have an error in that because one emperor changed his name during his reign, Dionysius counted him twice.

He was almost certainly acquainted with a suggestion by Hippolytus (170–236) that the date of Jesus' birth was December 25, but the trouble was that Hippolytus had not backed up this claim with sound arguments. Dionysius, however, had just the argument: His contemporaries claimed that God created the earth on March 25. It was inconceivable that the son of God could have been in any way imperfect. Therefore Jesus must have been conceived on March 25. This meant that he must have been born nine months later—December 25. Dionysius also concluded that, as a perfect being, Jesus could not have lived an incomplete life so he must have died on March 25 as well!

December 25 was an auspicious choice. In 274, in Rome, the Emperor Aurelian declared December 25 a civic holiday in celebration of the birth of Mithras, the sun god. By 336, in that same city, Christians countered by celebrating the birth of Jesus, the son of God, on December 25. Christians in Antioch in 375 celebrated the birth of Jesus on January 6. Christians in Alexandria did not begin to celebrate Christmas at all until 430. So until Dionysius came along there was confusion over dates, and debates raged, even over the usefulness of celebrating the birth of Jesus at all. What had been universally important for all Christians—the pre-eminent event—was the celebration of Easter.

When, in 527, he formalized the date of Jesus' birth, Dionysius put Christmas on the map. Jesus was born, he declared, on December 25 in the Roman year 753. Dionysius then suspended time for a few days, declaring January 1, 754—New Year's day in Rome—as the first year in a new era of world history.

With a stroke of ingenuity Dionysius had managed to shift the attention of the church from Easter to Christmas. From this point in time it seemed only logical to celebrate the birth of Jesus before his death. If Jesus' death by crucifixion had made possible salvation for all people everywhere, so the argument went, then his birth was the sign that God was identifying with human kind by taking human form.

But Dionysius made a mistake in his calculations. Perhaps he had never read the gospel account of the birth of Jesus. In Matthew Jesus is said to have been born while Herod was still King (2:1). That would translate into 4 BC (or even earlier) according to the calculations of Dionysius. As a consequence, for Christians the year 2000 is not two thousand years after the birth of Jesus, but more like 2004.

That was not his only mistake. Dionysius followed the convention of his times and, as the Roman calendar moved from the year 753 to 754, he called the latter "year one" of the New World order—anno domini, the year of our Lord. The concept of naught (zero) didn't come into Europe from Arabia and India until about two hundred years later. As a result, centuries end with naught and begin with the digit one. So for us the year 2000 was the end of one millennium but it was not the beginning of the next: that occurred in 2001.

Later, when Pope Gregory tidied up the calendar on 24 February 1582, the calendar lost eleven days. To synchronise the calendar of Dionysius with the movement of the sun, October 4 became October 15, and to avoid having to make further adjustments a leap year was introduced. Pope Gregory must also have known of the mistakes made by Dionysius but all he did was to confirm them, perhaps hoping that no one would notice.

There is one other problem. Bishop Ussher (1581–1656) worked out the precise year of creation as 4004 BC (he knew about Dionysisus getting the date of Jesus birth wrong). But he also advanced the view that the earth had a total life span of six thousand years. In order to come up with this conclusion he based his calculations on all the generations mentioned in the Bible.


In reality we do not know when Jesus was born—neither the year, the month, nor the day. The chronology of our western calendar is based on mythology masquerading as theology. We do well to treat it all with the humour it deserves.
Like I said, the springboard some have taken to justify their theology is at variance with God's declared method. Follow the stars, moon, and sun for the correct observance.
 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
Like I said, the springboard some have taken to justify their theology is at variance with God's declared method. Follow the stars, moon, and sun for the correct observance.

To be frank, I have no idea what point you are trying to make and you certainly do not understand mine. I'll await any calendar that you propose.
 
Upvote 0

pinacled

walking with the Shekinah
Apr 29, 2015
3,311
1,007
United states
✟171,798.77
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
To be frank, I have no idea what point you are trying to make and you certainly do not understand mine. I'll await any calendar that you propose.
Oh,
Viz knows very well how to fly.

Proposing a differential calender aspect is my area.
.
And foul birds nesting in dead trees will be dealt with.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums