# Orthodox Jews: The Canon and the Sacrificial System with no Temple



## Semper Fidelis (Oct 16, 2008)

I was in SD a few weeks ago smoking a cigar at a coffee shop talking to the owner when an orthodox Jew walked up. The owner (an extremely lax Muslim whose parents moved from Afghanistan when he was a kid) gave him a hard time (they're friends). Anyway, the subject of Christ came up and he made some comments that were designed to make me angry (they didn't work).

We ended up talking a bit and I simply mentioned to him that he had no way to atone for his sin. Predictably, he argued that God now accepted his prayers as a sacrifice but he made a point that I didn't really have a response to: the Babylonian Exile.

He relied on a Tradition that taught that God accepted prayer in lieu of sacrifice for that period. I obviously didn't buy that as a standard but I also hadn't really considered how Daniel and the remnant were able to bring a sacrifice for their sin during that period. Any thoughts?

Second question: Anybody familiar with how the Jewish Tradition diverged on the point of what translation the Canon is based upon. He indicated some errors in Christian translations and using the wrong Hebrew. I heard something the other day that the Rabbis shifted trails in their acceptance of the Septuagint after the fall of Jerusalem.


----------



## Christusregnat (Oct 16, 2008)

The man seems to have a point...


----------



## Herald (Oct 16, 2008)

Let's say that this Jewish man was right in regards to the exilic era. How would prayers of contrition and repentance _supercede_ blood sacrifices at the temple? God may have accepted them as equal. Or maybe the LORD was honoring this type of sacrifice:



> Jeremiah 4:4 4 "Circumcise yourselves to the LORD And remove the foreskins of your heart, Men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem,



Could the LORD having been looking for true repentance instead of temple rituals?


----------



## Staphlobob (Oct 16, 2008)

Semper Fidelis said:


> for that period.



There's your answer. Otherwise, why rebuild the temple and start up with the sacrificial system when prayers work?


----------



## MOSES (Oct 16, 2008)

Semper Fidelis said:


> the Babylonian Exile.
> 
> He relied on a Tradition that taught that God accepted prayer in lieu of sacrifice for that period. I obviously didn't buy that as a standard but I also hadn't really considered how Daniel and the remnant were able to bring a sacrifice for their sin during that period. Any thoughts?




Was not the exile punishment for sin? Why would they need to offer a sacrifice for sin in the midst of sins punishment....


----------



## Stomata leontôn (Oct 16, 2008)

During the Babylonian exile, the Jews still believed in Christ, the one true Sacrifice, who was to come; thence their salvation. Today's "Jews" do not, therefore there is no atonement for their sins -- whether they sacrifice (now fulfilled anyway) or pray.

Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and John Chrystostom give very excellent reasons why the Jews abandoned the LXX and document specific examples where the Jews had removed portions from the Scriptures they were using at the time.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Oct 16, 2008)

Gentlemen,

We're dealing with what amount to sacraments in the OT. I have not trouble understanding that the Jews were saved by a trust in Christ during the Exile but I think you can understand why a Jew today would argue for this point. In their mind, they are simply in another Exile awaiting for the restoration and, if they can establish that Babylon was a period that didn't need any sacramental sacrifice for sin then the fact that they don't have one today leaves them nonplussed.

Is there any indication that Levites were performing sacrifices in Babylon.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Oct 16, 2008)

Peter H said:


> During the Babylonian exile, the Jews still believed in Christ, the one true Sacrifice, who was to come; thence their salvation. Today's "Jews" do not, therefore there is no atonement for their sins -- whether they sacrifice (now fulfilled anyway) or pray.
> 
> Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and John Chrystostom give very excellent reasons why the Jews abandoned the LXX and document specific examples where the Jews had removed portions from the Scriptures they were using at the time.



Would you care to summarize what these Church Fathers gave as "excellent reasons"?


----------



## MW (Oct 16, 2008)

Semper Fidelis said:


> Second question: Anybody familiar with how the Jewish Tradition diverged on the point of what translation the Canon is based upon. He indicated some errors in Christian translations and using the wrong Hebrew. I heard something the other day that the Rabbis shifted trails in their acceptance of the Septuagint after the fall of Jerusalem.



I am guessing that this probably refers to the fact that many "Christian" texts and translations allow for reconstruction of the Hebrew text based on "Septuagintal" readings.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Oct 16, 2008)

armourbearer said:


> Semper Fidelis said:
> 
> 
> > Second question: Anybody familiar with how the Jewish Tradition diverged on the point of what translation the Canon is based upon. He indicated some errors in Christian translations and using the wrong Hebrew. I heard something the other day that the Rabbis shifted trails in their acceptance of the Septuagint after the fall of Jerusalem.
> ...



What text do Orthodox Jews use? The Masoretic text?


----------



## MW (Oct 16, 2008)

Semper Fidelis said:


> What text do Orthodox Jews use? The Masoretic text?



Not sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Aramaic translated in apostolic times carries some authority; I imagine Jewish traditions can be as diverse as ours.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Oct 16, 2008)

armourbearer said:


> Semper Fidelis said:
> 
> 
> > What text do Orthodox Jews use? The Masoretic text?
> ...



From what I understand, the Jews accepted one textual tradition prior to Christianity and then another after its ascendence but I'm unfamiliar with the details. I've read Edersheim's works a number of years ago and he might deal with it. I do distinctly remember that Rabinnical tradition before Christ is significantly different than what arose after the Temple destruction.


----------



## MW (Oct 16, 2008)

Semper Fidelis said:


> From what I understand, the Jews accepted one textual tradition prior to Christianity and then another after its ascendence but I'm unfamiliar with the details. I've read Edersheim's works a number of years ago and he might deal with it. I do distinctly remember that Rabinnical tradition before Christ is significantly different than what arose after the Temple destruction.



Interesting; something worth looking into.


----------

