Board index ‹ Jesus

[Dude]

Why is this sacredness and purity required?

[jimwalton]

So that the holiness of God's people matched the holiness of God's nature. Since God is holy and dwells in holiness, He provided a way (through a variety of mechanisms) whereby they could be deemed holy, and His presence could dwell in their midst.

[Dude]

Oh, so they were rules that God set up.

[jimwalton]

You seem to be working very hard to twist this into what you want it to be, determined to make it what you want it to be. "Rules" is not the appropriate term. The rituals had an ethical and a symbolic component to teach about the character of God and to symbolize what it meant to be in relationship with Him. As you and your significant other negotiate the intimate relationship between you, there are certain aspects of attitude and behavior that take a certain shape so that the relationship is healthy. I don't think anyone would call them "rules," and so it was between God and His people. The guidelines, which were not prescriptive legislation, outlined what were expressions of wisdom, right, good (morality), fairness, and holiness. They were covenant purposes through which God could reveal Himself and through which the people could live in relationship with Him. The purpose was never to establish rules, but rather to reveal the character and nature of YHWH.

[Dude]

> The guidelines, which were not prescriptive legislation,

Hmm, the name of the 5 book collection that these "guidelines" were enumerated in... The Torah... What's the English translation of that word?

[jimwalton]

"Torah" means "instruction." The Torah was not a battery of prescriptive laws, but instead how Israel was to conduct itself. The "laws" of ancient Near East were never based in case law, precedent, or technical arguments as ours are. Instead, the ancient judge was to know the holy book of the covenant so he would be wise enough to make a wise decision in the situation. It didn't matter, as opposed to our world, what the person in the next town did or what the judge five years ago ruled. Rather, a good judge was the one who had wisdom to make a good ruling.

The Torah is a book of the covenant, not a list of rules. Even what we call the "Ten Commandments" is a misnomer. In Exodus they are called the "Ten Words." As John Walton writes,

"The Decalogue, like the rest of the Torah, is focused on instructing Israel as to the nature of the societal order that would reflect the reputation God desires for Himself. The ten “words” provide information about the shape of the covenant community, both in terms of how the community interacts with YHWH and how the Israelites interact with one another. The words are not intended to establish morality; they characterize the ways that Israel, YHWH’s covenant people, can retain God’s favor and thereby receive life in the land. They describe the sort of society that YHWH wishes is to establish for the reflection of his identity in the context of the cultural river of the ANE as He administers favor, blessing, and presence as opposed to curses, abandonment, and exile."

By Walton, again:

"We have to see ancient law in its ancient context, not as we look at law. It was never meant to be prescriptive legislation. It was only after the Reformation that people grew to think of law a codified legislation that is coercive in nature. Consequently, today we think of law as reflected in a legal code. Prior to that, society was regulated by customs and norms, regulated by the wisdom of the judge. It was more flexible. Judges were those who were considered wise in the traditions and values of the culture rather than those who were specially educated. The law was not codified legislation, but rather what wise people deemed to be right, good, and fair. ... The Torah is in this same cultural river. It is there to teach wisdom, not legislation. It is not meant to be comprehensive. For example, it contains little to nothing about marriage, divorce, inheritance, or adoption (four BIG deals in Israelite society). One can notice that the Torah is never relied on as a legal, normative basis for judicial rulings. Rather, it was intended to give the king/judge wisdom to do his job."

[Dude]

> Torah" means "instruction

And LAW.

[jimwalton]

Your comment shows that you have probably missed the whole point. "Law" to them didn't mean prescriptive rules and regulation, or legislation to be followed. That's what law means to US. "Law" to them meant "instruction." The ancient Near East is a non-legislative society; legal structure is not based on written documents or prescriptive legislation. The Hammurabi collection, for instance, is a listed example of his verdicts, held up as models from a wise judge. In other words, they are not lists of rules with accompanying consequences. The ancient codes never attempt to be exhaustive or comprehensive, because that was not their purpose. Ancient “lawyers” never rested on previous cases or precedent. Ancient litigants didn’t want the judge to use a book or rules, constraints, and precedents to make his decisions. Instead, they expected a judge to use his intuitions, values, morality, and wisdom. They knew nothing of "law" the way we define it, understand it, and use it. As I quoted, the Torah is never relied on as a legal, normative basis for judicial rulings. Rather, it was intended to give the king/judge wisdom to do his job. The term never refers to codified legislation, which is what I presume you mean by "law."

The Hebrews didn't have a term for "law" meaning what ours means. All their different synonyms represent different aspects of what we would call "law," but for them, there was no such thing as prescriptive legislation.

Torah = instruction, insights

Mishpat = Rights

Mitsyot = Obligations

Chuqqot = Decrees, directives

[Dude]

Did I mention I'm Jewish?

[jimwalton]

No, but that doesn't really matter. In reality, it's helpful and I'm glad. Presuming that you have been trained in biblical Hebrew, then you know what I'm saying is true. But even if you're Jewish, that doesn't mean you've studied the culture of the ancient Near East. As I've said several times, "law" to them doesn't mean what "law" does to us. "Gay" today doesn't mean what it meant 75 years ago. "Infrastructure" apparently doesn't mean what it meant even 5 years ago. Anyone who reads Shakespeare can tell that the meaning of words has changed. In the King James Bible, "conversation" means way of life; in our world it means a dialogue between people.

If you're Jewish, you know that Torah means "instruction; insights." And you know that the "Ten Commandments" is a misnomer, because it's really the "Ten Words." And I've shown you that in the ancient world "law" meant something different than it does now. I'm glad to hear you're Jewish. It should be at least a little easier for you to comprehend what I'm saying. And you know that I'm telling you the truth about mishaps, mitsyot, chuqqot, and torah. It's a completely different worldview of law than ours.

On the other hand, I know that many Jews today are secular and even atheist, as you have identified yourself to be. In that case, I'm not sure I'd expect that you know the nuances of biblical Hebrew or have researched the cultures of the ancient Near East. Your religious heritage doesn't necessarily guarantee a certain level of linguistic competence or understanding in these matters.