Religious Politics
But perceiving that one group were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, Paul began crying out in the Council, “Brethren, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees; I am on trial for the hope and resurrection of the dead!” Acts 23:6 NASB
Resurrection – We probably think that Paul used the belief in the resurrection as a way to create dissention between the jurors at this trial. It certainly accomplished that, but not simply because one group believed in the resurrection and the other didn’t. What is at stake here is a question of inspiration and authority. Paul’s declaration doesn’t just touch on this dispute. It questions the entire approach to Scripture by the Sadducees.
The Sadducees rejected the idea of the resurrection of the dead because it was not found in the Torah of Moses. Is this because they viewed the Torah of Moses as eternal and timeless instruction but the rest of the Tanakh as conditionally dependent of historical circumstances? Notice that non-canonical books include the idea of resurrection of the dead, and these books were recognized in the first century BCE, but that did not change the opinion of the Sadducees. Basically, the Sadducees only accepted the official Torah of Moses, that is, the Pentateuch. Everything else was commentary and was not authoritative. The Pharisees accepted most of what we now have as Hebrew Scripture as equally inspired by God and equally authoritative. Paul’s statement doesn’t question just one doctrine. It challenges everything these two groups thought about Scripture.
Amazingly, the Sadducees were the conservatives of the first century. They held to established tradition and a closed canon. The Pharisees were the liberals. Their view of Scripture and canon was fluid. They were open to new revelation. In our day, they would be considered the neo-orthodox. It’s ironic that we consider the Sadducees obstructionists and theologically incorrect when it was the Pharisees who were pushing the envelope of scriptural authority. Two thousand years later we have reversed the opinion of who was right and who was wrong. Of course, if your theology teaches that the resurrection is not biblical, then you simply cannot accept a claim that Yeshua rose from the dead. The evidence doesn’t matter. It simply is not allowed. Two thousand years later we side with the liberals of the first century because we accept the evidence. And we don’t even notice that we have adopted first century neo-orthodoxy.
Did the Sadducees believe in the one true God? Absolutely! Did they believe the revelation of God through Moses? Without question! But their paradigmatic commitment to only this much prevented them from entertaining anything else. They got stuck while God continued. Reflect on this for just a moment. Then ask yourself, “Is it possible that I’m stuck in my paradigm commitments while God is moving on?”
Topical Index: Sadducees, resurrection, anastasis, Acts 23:6, paradigm, neo-orthodoxy
So, I reflected on your question for a moment…and had to think of all the different denominations we have, and all the “New Year Prophesies” that every year basically says that God is doing something new. Charismatics move on, based on what the “Spirit” says today, and tend to neglect big parts of the Bible. The Catholic church decided that they had the authority to change Shabbat to Sunday, biblical festivals to “redeemed” pagan ones, etc. Both (and many other) could be considered groups of people, moving on. Then I thought of biblical texts about “following the ancient paths”, remembering, about not adding or taking away from the Torah, etc. This is going to take more than a moment’s reflection. How do we know that we are moving on with God in a right way; that new ideas truly are from Him? This should be a very interesting discussion.
You bring up excellent perspective. How does Jesus bringing the age of grace play into your questions as well, when the Sabbath day is concerned and redeemed pagan festivals?
I’m a bit confused. When did Yeshua bring an age of grace? Grace has always been YHVH’s attitude toward men, all the way back to Genesis 3. And when was Sabbath ever pagan? Perhaps you could explain a bit.
i think the Sadducees must have been the humanists of their day. They were exclusive, wealthy and materialistic. If the human mind could not imagine it, they thought it could not exist. When Yeshua essentially told them that their founding fathers were being held in the Mind of God as if they were alive, until the resurrection, it had to have been a rebuke to the finiteness of their own minds. The Mind of God is an astounding thing.
Today we, because we are tempted by the worship of our own minds, are vulnerable to the same deceptions that afflicted the Sadducees. If our own minds cannot conceive of it, it cannot be so, we reason. But when we fall for that, we are forgetting that the Mind of God is not like ours, and what is held in that Mind has no limits on it. The resurrection will be a sum total of those who He remembers, and He remembers all of us. Even the resurrection of the damned will be of those He has not forgotten.
The sharp rebuke of Yeshua that the Sadducees did not know their own Scriptures (which was what they boasted they knew the best), because they did not have the power of God, is for us, too. It teaches us that knowledge is no good if we do not have the ability to use that knowledge. That takes the “power of God” (Matt. 22:29). His Word cannot even be understood – much less do us any good – unless it is also accompanied by His Mind. Um, for us, that would be the “mind of Christ”. I think all knowledge, and especially Scripture, is best approached with prayer requests for the Holy Spirit, for that is our given vector to that Mind. We are told that the only reason we do not have is because we do not ask. That goes for knowledge, too. It can be right in front of my face, but, given heaven’s principle of those three-foot spoons, I still need to be fed. And say grace, too!
Amen and Amen again Laurita – will email later today
In the early book of Acts Peter and John also head conflict with the Sadducees about the resurrection. Controversial thoughts causes to choose because of thought process it is okay to hold an opinion but it is also valid for someone else to have theirs. Then guess what the Holy Spirit comes and the decision is sealed
I think the Sadducees and the Pharisees had one thing that allowed them to occupy the same space at the same time (Temple, Land, appointment as a nation) and that was Torah. For all of the differences between them surrounding that, they knew they had that.
I am surrounded by my dear family and friends who attend Christian Churches and worship a god they declare has announced the Torah as essentially dead and gone. Where I once sat next to them; I now feel that I would be doing exactly what God instructed the Israel Nation not to do with those around them…be led away from His instructions.
I’m on trial because I don’t believe ‘Jesus’ is God, I don’t believe in the human sacrifice of the cross, I don’t believe anyone should pay for my sins, I don’t believe human blood made atonement for me, I don’t believe I should consume the blood of any creature nor eat human flesh in any form or idea (communion)… all because I don’t believe Torah is dead.
But I do believe in the resurrection; because Torah has returned to life for me.
Hi Richard,
I’m not trying to be feisty or challenging…just hoping to get some clarification on your comment.
What is your understanding of “atonement” and how we, as humans, can obtain it…according to your interpretation of Scripture?
Thank you for the interest Judi!
Blood is not necessary for sin atonement;
If, however, he cannot afford two doves or two young pigeons, he is to bring as an offering for his sin a tenth of an ephah of fine flour for a sin offering. He must not put oil or incense on it, because it is a sin offering. He is to bring it to the priest, who shall take a handful of it as a memorial portion and burn it on the altar on top of the offerings made to the Etrnl by fire. It is a sin offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for him for any of these sins he has committed, and he will be forgiven. The rest of the offering will belong to the priest, as in the case of the grain offering. [Leviticus 5:11-13]
So Aaron did as Moses said, and ran into the midst of the assembly. The plague had already started among the people, but Aaron offered the incense and made atonement for them. [Numbers 16:47]
Then one of the seraphs flew to me with a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with tongs from the altar. With it he touched my mouth and said, “See, this has touched your lips; your guilt is taken away and your sin atoned for. [Isaiah 6:6-7]
…if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land. [2 Chronicles 7:14]
Please ask again if you find this not the answer you were looking for.
Malachi 3:6,
For I am the Eternal, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
Richard,
What is your understanding of Skip’s (and Scripture’s) references to Yeshua being slain before the foundations of the earth as our sin atonement…and His death on the cross serving to conquer death…allowing for our resurrection?
I would have to review Skip’s material to garner a better understanding even though I have read most everything Skip has published and heard most of his available lectures so I can’t comment now on those items…
I have been bothered by the pre-existence, i.e. Yeshua on the Heavenly alter. The arrival of a pre-existence form into another form (human) is a slippery slope to re-incarnation and opens the door to a possible false declaration of reforming (as God).
I find that ‘the word’ spoken of by John was absconded with by the ‘church’ as where the Hebrew shows a reference to Torah and as such that reference in the Septuagint would remain Torah although in Greek and the NT Greek from a Jew point of view would infer Torah. If there ever was a pre-existence of anything…it would be Torah, yes?
IF there was a pre-existent ‘atonement’ made for our sin, then the acts in the Temple might be just facilitating our need to acknowledge to God repentance…could be, that would be more along the lines of Korban. But once again with Yeshua on the alter, we run into the idea of human/angelic/(fill in the blank) sacrifice where the Tanakh tells us that is absolutely abhorrent to God – Jeremiah 19:4-6
I agree, Richard, and if I ever write a revision to Cross Word Puzzles, I would make a change at this point. Pre-existence is a development of the Trinitarian view, as far as I can see. The idea of Torah as “word” makes a lot more sense from the Hebraic perspective. So the sacrifice before the foundation of the world could be a statement about the proleptic intention of YHVH or it means something other than human sacrifice (since there were no humans before the foundation of the world). Have to rethink all this.
It seems to me that you would have to rethink more than just that, though. It is absolutely clear to me that the bloody offerings of unblemished animals were a substitute for SOMETHING. What? You would also have to go back and exegete all references to blood, too. Ready for that? And what “human sacrifice”? A lamb is a lamb, isn’t it, as in, not necessarily a human. Even if the lamb was symbolic, too, it would not necessarily have to be a symbolic human, would it? Well, I guess it would if you were having to start from the paradigmic assumption that Yeshua was ever and only a human, and that the aforementioned lamb was, in fact, Him. Lots of assumptions before we even can start!
Cross Word Puzzles was insightful. But I was still left with a few puzzles.
So was I. But that’s part of the process, isn’t it? More questions lead to more investigation which just might change how we think about things.
Amein, and todah, Skip, appreciate this adjustment so much. That phrase- before the foundation of the world, has not bothered me since I am convinced beyond doubt that human sacrifice is abhorring to the GOD of Israel, and such verse/s are NOT found in the Tanakh.
Well expressed, Richard, in these comments / replies. I so agree with all of them. What a refreshing change of understanding from most of what’s posted here.
So encouraging! A paradigm to move into. Shalom!
As I read this, Judi, I thought, outloud, “SHUV, we must shuv!”, and now Richard has posted his response before I could return from my seeking to respond. He has spoken well. Ki chesed hapatzti, v’lo zevach Hos 6:6; Mic 6:6-8; Pro 21:3
And I offer this, from the JNTC: “Our rabbis taught: ‘It is written, “I kill, and I make alive” (Deu 32:39). I could understand: I kill one person and give life to a different one, as the world goes on [some die, others are born]. This is why Scripture says [immediately afterwards, in the same verse], “I wound, and I heal.” Just as the wounding and healing [clearly] refer to the same person, likewise putting to death and bringing to life refer to the same person. This refutes those who claim that resurrection is not implied by the Torah.’ ” (Sanhedrin 91b)
And truly, Torah and Tanakh are filled with the truth that when one shuvs, there is healing, there is life.
And I think of this song…https://youtu.be/7vBZynlsq2w
For future reference, Leslee. Please just post the title and maybe where someone could find it instead of posting links to outside sources.
Reason being, links go away and then I have to fix them when I get a notice that it’s a bad or broken link. Plus, dead links cause long page load times and therefore affects the overall ranking of the website.
Besides that, I really liked the song!
Thank you.
Thank you, Mark. I’m too used to social media that posts a clear connector (like Facebook) from the link, so, for everyone – seeing as how I can’t edit posts here – it is a Michael Card song – “Go Find Out What This Means” from his Matthew album. As I listened (again) SKIP, you’ll like the sax!!
Yeshua seemed to teach that the “doctrine of resurrection” IS available in the Torah. Ex 3:6/ Lu 20:35-40…for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear.
Dee makes an excellent point here. According to Luke 20:37 and Strong’s definition of the Greek “menuo”, Moses did disclose/report/declare/intimate that, the dead are raised.
According to my understanding, not only Abram’s seed, but Abram himself was promised large amounts of territory far beyond what he ever possessed. Therefore the even the Sadducees should have believed in at least his resurrection.
Gen 13:14 And Yahweh Elohim says to Abram after Lot was parted from him, “Lift your eyes, pray, and see. From the place where you now are, northward and toward the south-rim and eastward and seaward, 15 for all the land which you are seeing, to you am I giving it, and to your seed, till the eon.
Deu_1:8 See! I have set the land before you. Enter and tenant the land about which Yahweh had sworn to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob, to give to THEM and to their seed after them.
Deu_30:20 by loving Yahweh your Elohim, hearkening to His voice and clinging to Him (for that means life to you and prolonging of your days) so that you may dwell on the ground about which Yahweh had sworn to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob, to give to THEM.
You all have great input. I have mentioned before part of the Messianic fulfillment on the day of atonement Yom Kippur corporate confession of wrongdoings known and unknown covered by the blood of the Lamb. Very very powerful. Shalom
P. S. This also speaks of Moses’s declaration of a greater profit than he would follow being the Messiah. Yeshua is the only way to the father and it is the father who shows Mercy to all who shuv as mentioned in an earlier post. It is also a type of reconciliation of what the Lord wants in our lives getting back on track so to speak.
Somebody please tell me where the Father said “the only way to get to me is through the son or the messiah!!”
Actually, the FATHER didn’t say this. The statement is in John 14:6. Yeshua describes himself as the way to the Father. The question is whether the statement is descriptive or prescriptive. I discuss this at length in my book, Cross Word Puzzles
Skip, I do understand the NT quote. My query is where does the Father say that we have to go through an intermediary to be “saved”. Incidentally i do have Xword puzzles, two of them,,,gave one to Beth.. Love d
OK, sorry I misread your question. Glad you liked the book. Intermediary isn’t needed for grace to abound. Yeshua does something else, right? Something quite important to ALL creation.
Skip, You are speaking of the death and resurrection of yeshua as showing that the Father, rather than the Romans, had the power over life and death , as opposed to him dying for our sins.???
Certainly YHVH has the power over life and death. However, I don’t think that is the issue with the cross. And I doubt the cross is primarily about atonement. Read the book, then let me know what you think.
Dennis I believe it was Paul who said this when he wrote to Timothy, 1Tim2:6-7.
This is also Paul’s foundation for his teachings in the other records. The question is why would he make this statement if it were not true…
The Yeshua said he was there before all the father’s of the faith.
Skip makes the claim that this was the ordained sacrifice since the beginning…
The question then why did the fathers not clarify this…
Or is it all allegoric… And when need to understand the meaning of these symbols as Paul explains concerning the two covenants…
Or…. the Sadducees were biblical reductionists. At the time, there was a generally accepted cannon, but the Sadducees only chose the part of scripture they wanted to be an authority. Perhaps a conservative regard for Moses was NOT their primary motivation? Maybe it’s no coincidence they picked the only part of scripture that supported their governmental offices and agendas?
Is a self-proclaimed “New Testament Christian” doing the same thing with the other side of the book?
Good point. Of course, we could say the same thing of the “Protestant” canon, right? Why do you suppose they removed books that had been part of sacred literature for over 1000 years? Or we might question how the canon came to be in the first place since at the time of Yeshua there was no “fixed” list in the Jewish world. Makes you wonder how much of Man’s agenda gets into the authority question.
I recently read Bart Ehrman’s “Misquoting Jesus”,… where he talked about the thousands of scriptural variations and mistakes in the primary documents of ‘God’s Word’.
I found it a wonderful and faith-building book. He tries so hard to make his point and denigrate the idea of scriptural reverence, but by the end I was just left thinking, “That’s it?! That’s the best examples of mistakes and variations?!”. God has remarkably preserved his acts in human history. It may not be as neat and clean as some would like, but similar to the process of canonization I’m amazed at what God has done in a messy world and even through people and councils with nefarious motivations.
Skip good question as I.M. I also am reflecting… Gabe asks a valid question and I add are we not stuck in the god of chasing the quest of knowing as much to ensure we do the right things. A friend once commented that it is strange how people generally older than 40 suddenly start researching the scriptures and left me with the open ended question why…
As for grace maybe we think of it as mercy from the death penalty instead of guidelines for interaction and a meaningful life, not necessarily a prosperous life. Again I read a challenge in your question are we at the crossroads or do we need a paradigm shift. That would depend on how we view God’s calling. Cognitive choice or indoctrinated lifestyle…
Yeshua introduced the paradigm shift… The letter is dead the spirit brings life. Or born of earth (mankind per se) is not God sent. We must be born of spirit and water… YHVH specific calling and teachings of wisdom… Laurita puts it well the mind of Christ.
Paul is the only NT author to explain what Christ is when he reiterated Moses in Deut 4 and 6 the words taught are for knowledge of life in abundance and blessing guidelines from YHVH. And the application of these not the obedience thereto will show the nations what a wise and powerful nation the chosen people are Christ the power and wisdom of God.
John 1 it is when we permit these guidelines to form our walk of life that we become sons and daughters of God… Taken from death or works that do not represent God’s will into Christ the works that do…
Your goal for 2017 is to know the spiritual side and this is how I understand it. Not Christianity or Judaism can save but when we go from house to house doctrine to doctrine Sadducees to Pharisees city to city explaining the simplicity of God’s will. Love God by adapting your lifestyle to following His guidelines and then love human nature by helping others do likewise. When we do this the sabbath becomes our daily lifestyle while our knowledgeable approach becomes nothing…
Cognitive versus Called! I long to be called rather than acting out choices…