Post Reply
Page 1 of 5  •  1 2 3 4 5 Next
Switch to Forum Live View No Scriptures in the last 2400 years?
2 years ago  ::  Jun 11, 2012 - 3:29PM #1
chanceuse
Posts: 30
Hello everyone!

I'm continuing to read "Kosher Jesus" and something came to mind.
I would like to know what you make of no Scriptures in the last 2400 years.
All these prophets, it stops and no news for such a long time?

I look forward to reading you!
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 11, 2012 - 6:17PM #2
rocketjsquirell
Posts: 15,288

Hi!


At some point, prophecy ends in almost every religious tradition. The only traditions of which I am familiar where this has not occurred is the Church of Later Day Saints and the Baha'i.


The fact that prophecy ends does not mean that religious thought, innovation, ideas, etc... ends. In fact, the last few thousand years have been incredibly productive for Jewish thought and understanding. There has been no new Christian revelation since the death of Jesus (unless you think of the LDS as Christian) or Muslim revelation since the death of Mohamed. Both of those traditions seem to be doing fine as well.


I guess I do not understand your question. Could you explain it to me and I will attempt to provide a fuller answer.


   

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 12, 2012 - 10:08AM #3
vra
Posts: 6,395

"Scripture" refers to a certain set of books, but we have to remember that within Judaism there isn't the belief that divine inspiration stopped with them.  For example, there's the Talmud and Kaballah, both of which many of us find to be at least somewhat divinely inspired. 


But it doesn't even stop there.  When we take a look at the huge body of commentaries, might there not also be some divine inspiration being reflected, at least at times?  And what about our own personal inspirations as well?     

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 12, 2012 - 10:18AM #4
chanceuse
Posts: 30

Hello rocketjsqirell!


Thank you for taking the time.


You know, I had never thought of it that way (that in most cases, at some point, prophecy ends in almost every religious tradition).  


I also understand that the fact that prophecy ends does not mean that religious thought, innovation, ideas, etc... ends but I'm specifically talking about God's intervention. 


I have to first say that I'm not part of any religions so it may explain better what I'm about to say.


If it was me, I would expect the Messiah to come maybe a generation or two after the prophecies end (in the same way that Jesus seemed to say that the Kingdom of Heaven was just around the corner).  I guess it depends how we view the purpose of the prophecies.  I see them as announcing the Messiah so, when they end, the Messiah would normally come very soon after.


I hope I'm explaining myself accurately.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 12, 2012 - 3:58PM #5
Shusha
Posts: 4,345

chanceuse,


In the Jewish point of view, the time of the coming of the mashiach is influenced or determined by the conduct of mankind.  The prophecies, and the (divinely inspired) commentaries, describe the conditions of his coming.  Only G-d knows when those conditions will be fulfilled.  And in the meantime, we do our best to repair the world and fulfill G-d's commandments. 


In my mind (and this is just my own personal opinion, not a statement of Jewish belief), there are no more prophecies because nothing further needs to be said.  We have G-d's instructions.  Now its just a matter of fulfilling them. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 13, 2012 - 11:07AM #6
chanceuse
Posts: 30

Hi vra!


You write


"Scripture" refers to a certain set of books, but we have to remember that within Judaism there isn't the belief that divine inspiration stopped with them.  For example, there's the Talmud and Kaballah, both of which many of us find to be at least somewhat divinely inspired. 


And:


But it doesn't even stop there.  When we take a look at the huge body of commentaries, might there not also be some divine inspiration being reflected, at least at times?  And what about our own personal inspirations as well?


The way I interpret it is that, in the Tanakh, God speeks to Moses and the Prophets.  If I'm not mistaken, the Talmud is more human interpretation.  This would mean to me that the link is much more direct in the Tanakh.


Can you tell me if I'm wrong?

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 13, 2012 - 11:10AM #7
chanceuse
Posts: 30

Hi Shusha!


You write:


In the Jewish point of view, the time of the coming of the mashiach is influenced or determined by the conduct of mankind.  The prophecies, and the (divinely inspired) commentaries, describe the conditions of his coming.


At this rate, it may seem that it will never happen...


Can I ask if you see many signs that we are going in the right direction?  

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 13, 2012 - 12:08PM #8
ffb
Posts: 2,120

Jun 13, 2012 -- 11:07AM, chanceuse wrote:

Hi vra!


You write


"Scripture" refers to a certain set of books, but we have to remember that within Judaism there isn't the belief that divine inspiration stopped with them.  For example, there's the Talmud and Kaballah, both of which many of us find to be at least somewhat divinely inspired. 


And:


But it doesn't even stop there.  When we take a look at the huge body of commentaries, might there not also be some divine inspiration being reflected, at least at times?  And what about our own personal inspirations as well?


The way I interpret it is that, in the Tanakh, God speeks to Moses and the Prophets.  If I'm not mistaken, the Talmud is more human interpretation.  This would mean to me that the link is much more direct in the Tanakh.


Can you tell me if I'm wrong?


as a thumbnail response, you should make the following distinction:


the talmud is made up of 2 basic parts, the mishna (and to a lesser degree, the braita and tosefta) and then the gemara. The mishna is the oral law handed to Moses at sinai, and transmitted orally by the sages. It includes explanation and legal application, plus textual explication. The gemara is the record of rabbinic argument over the specific meaning of the mishnaic statements, supported by other mishna texts, exegetical rules or other biblical texts.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 13, 2012 - 12:17PM #9
LeahOne
Posts: 16,126

Hiya, Chanceuse : ))


I know you addressed this to Vra, and I'm not him on soooo! many levels (I'm a 'her') but:


The way I interpret it is that, in the Tanakh, God speeks to Moses and the Prophets.  If I'm not mistaken, the Talmud is more human interpretation.  This would mean to me that the link is much more direct in the Tanakh.


My observations:


1) Actually the whole of Tanakh is YHVH speaking to the Jews, and sometimes to other peoples or humanity as a whole as well.  Although it's the story of 'GOD, Jews, and History' (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Dimont) - anyone might find something positive in it.


2) YHVH does NOT require us to go through some intermediary to reach Him - nor do we need someone else to interpret His Tanakh for us.


3) I've heard that even YHVH studies Talmud....


Both the Tanakh and the Talmud are 'Torah' under one meaning - the Written and the Oral Teachings.  Tradition from antiquity holds that YHVH imparted to Moshe upon Sinai the TOTALITY of Jewish understanding of all time.  Even that which wasn't written yet, yes.


The functions of Tanakh and Talmud are different:  if Tanakh is like the US Constitution, then Talmud is the library of Supreme Court rulings and the results.


Talmud is very clearly 'human interpretation':  we know the names and the occupations, etc, of many of the individual contributors whose arguments are recorded there. 


There *is* a 'hierarchy' within Jewish religious teachings that places the Pentateuch before the Prophets, and the Prophets before the Writings and.....  I forget the rest, because it's not something I need to know on a constant basis not being an authority myself (so I look it up each time, lol!)  But it's ALL good.......



Can you tell me if I'm wrong?


>>> Of course I can, but the real question is 'How important is my opinion?'  LOL, sorry but this struck me as funny : ))  Since I as a Jew *should* know something about Judaism - you may consider my opinion more important than your own , as a courtesy to me.  Strictly voluntary on your part!


But, I'm not Vra and I'm not half the scholar he is - so you are certainly not 'wrong' to wait for his response  instead : ))


Nothing you've posted has been 'wrong', and certainly not a word less than respectful and courteous!  I hesitate to ever say 'wrong' unless & until the idea is absolutely counter to the bulk of what I know on a topic.  AND I will go and look it up so I can give some reference beyond my slender knowledge.



Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 13, 2012 - 12:23PM #10
LeahOne
Posts: 16,126

Yes, FFB has given you a deeper level of understanding than I did:  mine was TOO simplified and so lost accuracy.


Which is how I wound up implicitly contradicting myself:  how could 'Talmud' be 'mi Sinai' like the Tanakh AND also be 'human interpretation' at the same time?


My teachers at Gratz would be very annoyed at me  : ((

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 5  •  1 2 3 4 5 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook