Seat of Moses ?

Mercymessianicjudiasm · Apr 22, 2018

AbbaLove said:
How are you interpreting the following scriptures that clearly imply Pontius Pilate found no grounds for the death penalty of Yeshua. Also, there is the account of the Centurion's faith. Yeshua said He found no greater faith in Israel than that of this Roman Centurion's faith in Yeshua (Matthew 8:5-13).

Matthew 27:24
When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. “I am innocent of this man’s blood,” he said. “It is your responsibility!”
Mark 15:12-14
12 Pilate again said to them, “Then what should I do with the man you call the King of the Jews?”
13 They shouted back, “Put him to death on the stake!”
14 He asked, “Why? What crime has he committed?” But they only shouted louder, “Put him to death on the stake!”
Luke 23:20-25
20 Wanting to release Yeshua, Pilate appealed to them again.
21 But they kept shouting, “Crucify him! Crucify him!”
22 For the third time he spoke to them: “Why? What crime has this man committed? I have found in him no grounds for the death penalty. Therefore I will have him punished and then release him.”
23 But they went on yelling insistently, demanding that he be executed on the stake; and their shouting prevailed.
24 Pilate decided to grant their demand;
25 he released the man who had been thrown in prison for insurrection and murder, the one they had asked for; and Yeshua he surrendered to their will.

Verse 25 is the key, he refused to release Yeshua, he released an accused murderer instead. It should be obvious, the hands of Pilate were full of bacteria and germs; because he didn't honor his parents. He refused to go to a "private place" (bathroom) to wash his dirty hands with soap and water. I guess to release the guilty and convict the innocent (Proverbs 17:15), may be considered prudent if you publicly wash your hands before the people? Does "Roman law" require the governor to wash his hands before the people and declare his own "innocence" as he pronounces his verdict? If Roman law or judicial law does not require ceremonial or public handwashing, what type of justice is this? Pharisee Shaul, a roman citizen appealed to the Ceasar, a higher Court. The "seat of Moses" the highest Court or "throne" in Israel.

Mercymessianicjudiasm · Apr 22, 2018

danny ski said:
OK, I'll bite.
Pilate and the Romans murdered thousands of Jews. There was not an ounce of righteousness in Pilate. He was dismissed from his position for excessive abuses and ruthlessness. To make ANY kind of comparison between the executioner and his innocent victims is just perverse. I don't care if he washed his hands with acid or the holy water, he still was responsible for every Jewish life he ended, including the Christian messiah. Jesus, like many Jews of his time, had dogmatic differences with other Jews- that's entirely consistent with the religious climate of the Roman occupied Judea. Yet, he failed to register those differences in our sources and all we got is a bastardized version of events, written decades later, without context and without the other side having a chance to respond. And what's the result? The Pharisees are reduced to a caricature and a whole section of our society dismissed as hypocrites. Not a loving "messiah" from my pov.

So you agree with Pilate and the Pharisees ceremonial hand washing? Although Torah never tells them to do so, the priest had to do public service and duties.

straykat · Apr 22, 2018

I figured that Jesus was pointing out Levites, but then again, the Pharisees weren't necessarily Levite. So it was more general to the authority and instruction handed from Levites as well. It's especially sad since that world had the greatest Levitical descendant ever in John the Baptist, and let that "fox" Herod kill him. Nor did they listen to him anyhow.

I also don't think Jesus was particularly interested in taking their place or saying it because he'd do the job better. He was of the order of Melchizedek.

danny ski · Apr 22, 2018

Mercymessianicjudiasm said:
So you agree with Pilate and the Pharisees ceremonial hand washing? Although Torah never tells them to do so, the priest had to do public service and duties.

Any agreement with Pilate is a domain of Christianity. I'm not going to bother with him anymore than I would bother with a Nazi. If you knew anything about us, you'd recognize that the Purity Laws are a very big deal in the Jewish society. Not only the Torah spares quite a bit of space on the subject, but also the Oral Torah as well takes a great interest in the subject. Not to mention the communal rules of various communities at variety of times from the Essenses to the Hasidic dynasties. We wash our hands for variety of reasons, some of them are logical others are an extension of the Purity Laws. There's nothing special about it. Jesus may had disagreed about some aspects, a) it doesn't make him right- as he was not part of legislative, and b) it was a very long time ago and out of context and background.

straykat · Apr 22, 2018

danny ski said:
Jesus may had disagreed about some aspects, a) it doesn't make him right- as he was not part of legislative, and b) it was a very long time ago and out of context and background.

Not sure why it's so out of context. The temple is destroyed - and this is still relevant. Judaism is left with just synagogues, and can't fully practice the very purity laws it espouses. And it was all prophesied by Jesus. And as the temple is still relevant, so is he.

danny ski · Apr 22, 2018

straykat said:
Not sure why it's so out of context. The temple is destroyed - and this is still relevant. Judaism is left with just synagogues, and can't fully practice the very purity laws it espouses. And it was all prophesied by Jesus. And as the temple is still relevant, so is he.

We do what we can in the absence of the Temple. As for out of context, we only have half of the story and it's a second hand transmission at best. A precision in law is a very important issue among us, hence so many Jewish lawyers. The bottom line is that Jesus disagreed with a legal interpretation among his religious brethren. Nothing special about it. There were disagreements between various schools that ended up in street wars and murder. This one was pretty mild by the standards of the day. But, we really have nothing to go on because the disagreement never made it beyond his circle.

Meowzltov · Apr 22, 2018

Mercymessianicjudiasm said:
So you agree with Pilate and the Pharisees ceremonial hand washing? Although Torah never tells them to do so, the priest had to do public service and duties.

Remember that Yeshua ceremonially washed his hands, as did most of the disciples.

Meowzltov · Apr 22, 2018

Mercymessianicjudiasm said:
the hands of Pilate were full of bacteria and germs; because he didn't honor his parents.

Huh?

ralliann · Apr 23, 2018

pat34lee said:
I've seen that before. They are wrong, not surprisingly.

The verses in Hebrew or in decent translations do not
mention wool, as it isn't used in linen garments. If they
actually put priests in mixed garments, I would not want
to be them when they try to serve in the temple. Aaron's
sons found out what happened when they didn't follow
the directions they were given to the letter.

6 And they shall make the ephod of gold, of blue, and of
purple, of scarlet, and fine twined linen, with cunning work.

It is common knowledge that the priests garments were a mixture.
the colors mentioned were of wool. Then linen is mentioned separately.
And they shall take gold, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen.

Meowzltov · Apr 23, 2018

The Kohanim are not obligated in shatnez.

Heber Book List · Apr 23, 2018

Mercymessianicjudiasm said:
What does public handwashing prove when the Roman government continues to oppress the children of Israel and persecute their Messiah? Was Pilate hands clean, when he washed his hands without soap, released Barabbas?

The people were faced with two possibilities for release of a prisoner: one prisoner was called bar Abba (there was never a Barabbas, as such, that is a Greek word) and one who, so the authorities said, claimed to be King of the Jews. Yeshua did not use the title King of the Jews, but he did declare on more than one occasion that he was bar Abba (son of the / his father). When people got the choice of who to release they must have 'wrongly' realised that bar Abba was the one that many called Messiah, not the guy who appeared to claim that he was King of the Jews and so, egged on by Caiaphas, they 'voted' for bar Abba to be released. Had they voted for the King of the Jews, prophecy would not have been fulfilled at that point in history. Remember that people just did not recognise Yeshua - he was no different, visually, to any other Jew of his time, as we know, at least, by the fact that Judas had to kiss him to point him out from the others, so that the Priests and soldiers got the right man. He didn't have a halo!!

Mercymessianicjudiasm · Apr 23, 2018

danny ski said:
We do what we can in the absence of the Temple. As for out of context, we only have half of the story and it's a second hand transmission at best. A precision in law is a very important issue among us, hence so many Jewish lawyers. The bottom line is that Jesus disagreed with a legal interpretation among his religious brethren. Nothing special about it. There were disagreements between various schools that ended up in street wars and murder. This one was pretty mild by the standards of the day. But, we really have nothing to go on because the disagreement never made it beyond his circle.

You don't know which part of the story you have because you were not there. So instead of talking about what we don't know, let us discuss that which we do know. An impartial judge in a Court from law, issue verdicts concerning cases every day in which he was never there, including the prosecuting and defense attorneys. You do not need to know all the facts of the case to issue justice, you just need to know the "relevant" facts of the case. Yeshua says the Pharisees were hypocrites, I agree with his testimony.

danny ski · Apr 23, 2018

Mercymessianicjudiasm said:
You don't know which part of the story you have because you were not there. So instead of talking about what we don't know, let us discuss that which we do know. An impartial judge in a Court from law, issue verdicts concerning cases every day in which he was never there, including the prosecuting and defense attorneys. You do not need to know all the facts of the case to issue justice, you just need to know the "relevant" facts of the case. Yeshua says the Pharisees were hypocrites, I agree with his testimony.

OK. And the dispute never made it into our law nor do we have any evidence that the matter even made it before the judges. Frankly, we don't have any record of it and, to me, it sounds like a discourse on a street corner. That's the relevant fact- one group of Jews arguing with another.

Mercymessianicjudiasm · Apr 23, 2018

danny ski said:
OK. And the dispute never made it into our law nor do we have any evidence that the matter even made it before the judges. Frankly, we don't have any record of it and, to me, it sounds like a discourse on a street corner. That's the relevant fact- one group of Jews arguing with another.

We have a written record, it is called the bible. Do you honor Torah? Do you accept Yeshua as the Messiah?

Mercymessianicjudiasm · Apr 23, 2018

Heber Book List said:
The people were faced with two possibilities for release of a prisoner: one prisoner was called bar Abba (there was never a Barabbas, as such, that is a Greek word) and one who, so the authorities said, claimed to be King of the Jews. Yeshua did not use the title King of the Jews, but he did declare on more than one occasion that he was bar Abba (son of the / his father). When people got the choice of who to release they must have 'wrongly' realised that bar Abba was the one that many called Messiah, not the guy who appeared to claim that he was King of the Jews and so, egged on by Caiaphas, they 'voted' for bar Abba to be released. Had they voted for the King of the Jews, prophecy would not have been fulfilled at that point in history. Remember that people just did not recognise Yeshua - he was no different, visually, to any other Jew of his time, as we know, at least, by the fact that Judas had to kiss him to point him out from the others, so that the Priests and soldiers got the right man. He didn't have a halo!!

I thought a verdict is based on the evidence presented to the honourable Court? I did not know a mob of people can judge rightly or issue justice? The governor verdict concerning Yeshua "acquittal "(Matthew 27:18-19) so he should have been released. Yeshua should have been given the "throne of David", the people pledged their allegiance to Ceasar, the mob did not prefer the "seat of Moses" as the method of justice.

Meowzltov · Apr 23, 2018

Mercymessianicjudiasm said:
Do you accept Yeshua as the Messiah?

He is identified as practicing Judaism.

Mercymessianicjudiasm · Apr 23, 2018

Open Heart said:
He is identified as practicing Judaism.

What is the Statute of Limitations on the criminal charge of insurrection or him accepting the title King of the Jews?

Meowzltov · Apr 23, 2018

Mercymessianicjudiasm said:
What is the Statute of Limitations on the criminal charge of insurrection?

What does that have to do with the fact that those who practice Rabbinical Judaism (as opposed to Messianic Judaism) and therefore identify their religion as Judaism do not accept Yeshua as the Messiah? I think you are replying to the wrong post and the wrong person.

Mercymessianicjudiasm · Apr 23, 2018

Open Heart said:
What does that have to do with the fact that those who practice Rabbinical Judaism (as opposed to Messianic Judaism) and therefore identify their religion as Judaism do not accept Yeshua as the Messiah? I think you are replying to the wrong post and the wrong person.

I asked you a question, I never said my question was related to your response.

Mercymessianicjudiasm · Apr 23, 2018

Mercymessianicjudiasm said:
I thought a verdict is based on the evidence presented to the honourable Court? I did not know a mob of people can judge rightly or issue justice? The governor verdict concerning Yeshua "acquittal "(Matthew 27:18-19) so he should have been released. Yeshua should have been given the "throne of David", the people pledged their allegiance to Ceasar, the mob did not prefer the "seat of Moses" as the method of justice.

These "possible" criminal charges, levied against him could not be heard in a Court today, the Statute of Limitations have passed.

Seat of Moses ?

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Freylekher Yid

Freylekher Yid

christian

Freylekher Yid

Theologian [Applied Theology]

Active Member

Newbie

Active Member

Active Member

Freylekher Yid

Active Member

Freylekher Yid

Active Member

Active Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency