Yeshua Followed Oral Torah, when He didn’t agree with it?!?

So every week Jen and her girls come over for Bible study. We have been doing this for almost two years. We started with Restoration, then we worked through Torah Club Volume 1 and now we are going through Volume Four which is all about the four Gospels.

Well tonight we were working through Mark 9 and moved over to Matthew to pick up the chronological narrative where we found this gem:

Matthew 17:24 When they came to K’far-Nachum, the collectors of the half-shekel came to Kefa and said, “Doesn’t your rabbi pay the Temple tax?” 25 “Of course he does,” said Kefa. When he arrived home, Yeshua spoke first. “Shim`on, what’s your opinion? The kings of the earth — from whom do they collect duties and taxes? From their sons or from others?” 26 “From others,” he answered. “Then,” said Yeshua, “The sons are exempt. 27 But to avoid offending them — go to the lake, throw out a line, and take the first fish you catch. Open its mouth, and you will find a shekel. Take it and give it to them for me and for you.”

Now go back and read it again.

Yeshua was saying that the sons, the sons of Israel should not be taxed by their Father.(My dear sweet Husband, thinks that he may have only been talking about Himself, but that doesn’t alter the conclusion.)

Okay see the part where He says, “But to avoid offending them…”  Okay heres the big thing. Yeshua didn’t think that the “poll tax” was a proper interpretation of the Torah, but he also didn’t think that he should offend the sages and the priests that were in charge and opted to pay the tax. Here it is again, Yeshua didn’t agree with the Rabbi’s but he followed their ruling anyway!

Matthew 23 we see Yeshua telling us to respect the authority of the “seat of Moses” and then we actually see him doing it on a number of occasions. But here we see Him disagreeing and yet still following thier ruling! Wow, that’s huge!!


14 thoughts on “Yeshua Followed Oral Torah, when He didn’t agree with it?!?

  1. YahKheena April 3, 2011 / 9:58 am

    Very interesting indeed! But paying taxes isn't against Torah now is it? (or is it? hehe an after thought) However, if it were, I don't believe Yahshua would have been so willing to obey do you? Since breaking Torah is the definition of sin and He was sinless. Still what an awesome discovery!!
    Shalom my sister 🙂

  2. Mommy Set Free April 3, 2011 / 1:55 pm

    Hi Becky,
    This IS worth reflecting on. I tend to agree with Yahkheena, when it comes to NOT conflicting with Torah. Its funny, I see it a little differently too. It seems to me that it falls into the “don't sweat the small stuff- catagory”. (That is my paraphrase.) 🙂 IN otherwords…the idea that we render onto Ceasar what is Ceasars — just don't confuse it for what is important and why we are here! There are things we have to do on this earth…just do them peaceable so we can get back tot he Father's work. It is kind of like the idea of “being a peace with all men” as it says in the letters. Yeshua was very diplomatic in many of His ways. His parables and His methods of communicating were often (but not always) said in ways that would be even “criptic” so as to “go over the heads” of those whom needen't hear. And as we know He was often 'misunderstood' and wrong accused even when He was talking straight! So He wasn't about to give his accusers any extra ammo. He had a “task to fulfull” and it was important to do it in the Father's timing. I, in no way see it as Yeshua, “coming under” or “submitting” or “blessing” it…simple walking in the 'eb and flow' of the Ruach and NOT choosing to get caught up in the polatics and drama of things lesser important that what the Father had sent Him to do. (Likewise – he turned the tables when He did see it fit too!!) I think that is a greater lesson that I personally have learned from it…This is something that I pray I have the wisdom and discerment and strength to carry out in my walk too! There is that celtic (or is it Catholic???) saying (of which I am niether!!!) that says (paraphrase):

    Yah grant me the serentity to accept the things I can't change. The strength the change the things I can. And the wisdom to know the difference.

    For me….that has never been so true than when I started walking in Torah! 🙂 (How Ironic!!)

    Great little 'drash!
    Blessings and Shalom to you and yours,

  3. YahKheena April 3, 2011 / 2:05 pm

    Amen Pamela… don't sweat the small stuff… being at peace with all men… etc… I'm learning this daily 🙂

  4. Blacksheep April 3, 2011 / 5:28 pm

    We should take care to act to presumptuously with reguards to the teachings being handed down by the people appointed to make rulings on the intricacies of the Torah. Deut 17:8-13 is in the Torah. It spells out what is to be done in cases of differing opinion with regurds to the Torah, I'm not for gathering up bricks for a sling party, but it does show how seriously the most high takes it when we ignore the rulings of those given the authority to judge in matters of Halacha.

    Be Blessed.

  5. Blacksheep April 3, 2011 / 5:34 pm

    Let me ask you a question.

    Who sits in the seat of Moses today?

    Before you answer think about who Yeshua said sat in the seat of Moses in his day. Not I think the people we would want in the position, and yet there they were, and the Messiah blessed off on them. The Messiah himself rebuked these same people several times for a number of reasons, and called them out for violations of the Torah. However, at the end of the day, he recognised the authority given to them through the succession of the authority handed to Moses bu G-d himself.

  6. Blacksheep April 3, 2011 / 5:37 pm

    Oh and one last thing.

    Becky…Bobby says he wants a new hat…and a less formal vest for not shabbat… and a puppy… named skip…? Your husband is wierd.

  7. Becky April 3, 2011 / 11:08 pm

    Yahkeena – It's not that paying taxes is against Torah it is that the keepers of the Temple were using the instance of taking a census of the people recorded in Exodus to institute a poll tax once a year. They took something of the Torah, and elaborated on it and created something different.

    Mommy set Free – This isn't a tax for Ceaser or for Rome this is a Temple Tax and one that is not spelled out in Torah, though the basis for this tax which warrants a complete tractate in the Mishnah is based on the census in Exodus where every male older than 20 was to give a half shekel.

    I think we could take this as not wanting to make waves, but I think that we would be missing the point. The disciples would not have recorded an act of placation, they recorded this experience for some reason, we should try to figure out what it was.

    Blacksheep – You make a good point, I think we should pay particular attention to these two verses. “12”The man who acts presumptuously by not listening to the priest who stands there to serve the LORD your God, nor to the judge, that man shall die; thus you shall purge the evil from Israel. 13″Then all the people will hear and be afraid, and will not act presumptuously again.”

    Blacksheep – A new hat? He just got three new Kippah, another vest?, and a puppy?!? That is a big no go!!

  8. Mommy Set Free April 4, 2011 / 12:18 am

    Yes Becky, I know what you were talking about. I know it was not talking about Ceasar's taxes and that is was talking about the Temple Tax. I was using that as a parrallel situation to help show that just because Yeshua said pay Ceasar it does not mean He was telling his people to follow Ceasar but rather to be a “peacable and good citizen” (not to sweat the small stuff-because we are about our Father's business and not to get too wrapped up in the nitty gritty of the flesh). I must have just done it poorly. :-)(blush)

    The context of Duet 17:12,13 is also very very important to consider when looking at it. It is NOT talking about “what is to be done in cases of differing opinion with regurds to the Torah” as quoated by Blacksheep, but rather the context is in reference to those who have committed very serious crimes against Torah, as I quote from vs 8″ If any case arises requiring decision between one kind of homicide and another, one kind of legal right and another, or one kind of assault and another, any case within your towns that is too difficult for you”. It's context is to edify the priests and Judges and their ruling in the cases of serious matters that are taken to the “high court” if you will, for decisions…not when people disagree on differing opinions of Torah – let alone matters in the Mishna. It is intrinsically Hebrew to have several opinions and interpretations about the same thing..and there needs to be room for that in midrash.

    I do agree – that it is good to be respectful of our fellow brethern and difference of understanding and opinions. That is the true Hebrew way…and I think that even Yeshua was an amazing example of that in his diplomacy during His ministry even though He had all authority of Yah – above all man. Our biggest area of disagreement may be un the area of “authority” and who has it.

    Having said that – Becky, I want to express my sincere hope that I have not offended you – as the author of this blog post, as I am a guest here in your “house”. I hope that you understand that my difference of understanding these matters, is not meant to cause strife or start “fights”. I pray you recognise my heart in the discussion as purely intending it to be drash amongst “the family”.

    Blessings to you and yours (and yours too Blacksheep!)…I think we may need to “agree to disagree” on some matters and sign off in love. 🙂

    Shalom Shalom! pamela

  9. Blacksheep April 4, 2011 / 4:23 pm

    @Mommy – As a dear close personal friend of Becky I can assure you she wasn't offended in the least. Actually there are three levels of judgements being mentioned specifically in that verse.

    -bloodguilt: This is the serious matter of death both accidental and premeditated.
    -Pleas or disputes: this is the area of jurispudence known today as civil cases.
    -plague: the word Naga translated here as stroke is far more acurately translated as plague as is seen in the rest of of tis use in the Torah.

    As yiu can see the specifics of what is to be obeyed covers all areas the Torahs mitzvot.

  10. Becky April 4, 2011 / 5:05 pm

    @Mommy – Blacksheep has it right, I could never be offended by differing of opinions expressed so graciously. Tonight after the little ones are asleep I will sift through your comment, but wanted to let you know, definitely no offense 🙂

  11. Blacksheep April 4, 2011 / 6:20 pm

    How bout Skamp? Would that be a better name for a dog?

  12. Anders Branderud April 5, 2011 / 6:38 pm

    Shalom to you all,

    I found this blog today and I read the post and the comments.

    I agree with you whom are stating that mishpat – i.e. the logical decisions of the batei-din of how the mitzwot [directives] in Torah should be applied – should be followed.

    Ribi Yehoshua ha-Mashiakh – the Messiah – taught this in Netzarim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matityahu 23:1-3:

    ”Then Yehoshua spoke to the qehilot [congregations] and to his talmidim [apprentice-students] saying, ”The Sophrim and those of the Rabbinic-Perushim [Pharisees] sect of Judaism who advocate that Halakhah [mishpat] must be exclusively oral sit upon the bench of Mosheh. So now, keep shomeir and do concering everything – as much as they shall tell you! Just don’t imitate their maaseh [deeds] because they say but they don’t do.” [Link]

    The Rabbinic-Perushim taught that one should follow the mitzwot of Torah, which includes mishpatim, and Ribi Yehoshua taught that one should listen to that. There are more than 400 instances of the word mishpat, which confirms the authority of the batei din – Pharisee-heritage Judaic courts of deciding of the application of Torah-law – to decide mishpatim with a logical connection to the mitzwot. It is a decision of how the mitzwot should be applied – it is not an addition to Torah, nor a subtraction from Torah.

    The followers of Ribi Y’hoshua ha-Mashiakh were called the Netzarim.

    Torah including logical mishpat requires subordination to a Pharisee-heritage beit-din.

    Ribi Y’hoshua instituted the beit din ha-Netzarim. The only beit-din to subordinate to for those whom believed that Ribi Yehoshua was the Mashiakh was the beit-din ha [Judaic court of]-Netzarim; and the same is true for today. The beit din ha-Netzarim is ( led by Paqid Yirmeyahu ha-Tzadiq in Ra’anana in Israel.

    I wish you all the best and that you will apply what you learned!

    Anders Branderud

  13. Becky April 5, 2011 / 9:23 pm

    how about “still lives at the pound”?

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s