Page 47 - BV20

Is JUDAISM the Religion of Moses? 47

He cites an ex am ple from the Tal mud that il lus trates how forced in ter pre ta tions of the Scrip -
tures were used. An ex am ple is re corded in "San hed rin 17a." It states that one prom i nent Rabbi in -
sisted that no in di vid ual could be ad mit ted to the San hed rin UNLESS HE WAS ABLE TO PROVE
FROM THE SCRIPTURE THAT REPTILES WERE CLEAN. Of course, the Scrip ture plainly
states that all rep tiles are un clean (Lev. 11:41-42).

The rea son that such fal la cious in ter pre ta tions were re quired of the Rabbis was to see if
mem bers of the San hed rin were skilled enough in the Law, so they could, if nec es sary, twist the
plain mean ing of the Law to meet any re quire ment of a par tic u lar case.

An other Rabbi, us ing the same il lus tra tion, thought that a man was not qual i fied to sit in the
San hed rin un less he could give a hun dred ar gu ments for de clar ing a rep tile clean or un clean. The
Rabbis rea soned that a per son who could ac com plish such a task was qual i fied to sit in judg ment
over oth ers, be cause, if nec es sary, ad e quate grounds for ac quit tal could be given in any case (ibid.,
p. 63).

This de cep tive skill en abled them also to EFFECTIVELY give false grounds for
CONDEMNING THE INNOCENT, as they did in the case of Je sus Christ!

Pharisees Admit They Left the Teaching of Moses

The Phar i sees were well aware that they were leav ing the re li gious teach ings de liv ered by
Mo ses and the Prophets. Re cords are found in the Jew ish Tal mud which reg is ter many state ments
of the early pre-Chris tian Phar i sees. No tice that their own words are a wit ness to the fact that they
were well aware that they were leav ing the ways of Mo ses.

In a book of the Tal mud called Temurah, in sec tion 15b, we have the state ment of one em i -
nent Phar i see. It reads as fol lows:

"All the teach ers who arose in Is rael from the days of Mo ses un til the death of [last days of]
Jo seph ben Joezer STUDIED THE TORAH AS MOSES DID, BUT AFTERWARDS
THEY DID NOT STUDY THE TORAH AS MOSES DID."

The state ment could hardly be plainer. This is a clear ad mis sion that the Phar i sees, be gin -
ning with the days of Jo seph ben Joezer DID NOT STUDY AND TEACH AFTER THE MANNER
OF MOSES. The Phar i sees, from this time (160 B.C.) stopped teach ing the Word of God as had
Mo ses!

The Phar i sees KNEW they were de part ing from the truth. They KNEW that they were en -
act ing new com mand ments which had not the slight est hint of au thor ity in the Law of Mo ses! Phar -
i saic Ju da ism, with its in nu mer a ble man-made com mand ments, was never the re li gion of Mo ses!
Ju da ism rep re sents a de par ture from the re li gion of Mo ses, and the Phar i sees them selves can didly
ad mit it.

Let us notice another example from the Talmud.

The Berean Voice