Matthew and Maimonides – Parallel Lies Sometimes Meet

It may seem a rather extreme statement to compare the greatest Rabbi, Moses Maimonides, who is respected in all quarters of Judaism, to Matthew of the New Testament, who is certainly not well regarded by Jews, Orthodox or otherwise.

However, asides from the personality cult it would be helpful to compare the arguments they bring for their respective causes, and judge their credibility. Each one brings a chronology of an alleged chain of transmission, whether of genes of memes, i.e. genealogy in the former and transmission of oral law in the latter.

Let us start with the earlier book, from the NT:

Matthew 1

21st Century King James Version

1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham.

2 Abraham begot Isaac, and Isaac begot Jacob, and Jacob begot Judah and his brethren.

3 And Judah begot Perez and Zerah by Tamar, and Perez begot Hezron, and Hezron begot Aram,

4 and Aram begot Aminadab, and Aminadab begot Nahshon, and Nahshon begot Salmon,

5 and Salmon begot Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz begot Obed by Ruth, and Obed begot Jesse,

6 and Jesse begot David the king. And David the king begot Solomon by her that had been the wife of Uriah,

7 and Solomon begot Rehoboam, and Rehoboam begot Abijah, and Abijah begot Asa,

8 and Asa begot Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat begot Joram, and Joram begot Uzziah,

9 and Uzziah begot Jotham, and Jotham begot Ahaz, and Ahaz begot Hezekiah,

10 and Hezekiah begot Manasseh, and Manasseh begot Amon, and Amon begot Josiah,

11 and Josiah begot Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon.

12 And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begot Salathiel, and Salathiel begot Zerubbabel,

13 and Zerubbabel begot Abiud, and Abiud begot Eliakim, and Eliakim begot Azor,

14 and Azor begot Zadok, and Zadok begot Achim, and Achim begot Eliud,

15 and Eliud begot Eleazar, and Eleazar begot Matthan, and Matthan begot Jacob,

16 and Jacob begot Joseph, the husband of Mary of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations, and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations, and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.

There are several fallacies to this alleged chain, since we have no reliable record of who came after Zerubavel, and even if Joseph was the husband of Mary, Matthew claims that Jesus was in fact fathered by God – something outside of the TNK theology. Quite apart from that, Jesus did not fulfil the prophecies of what the Messiah would do, i.e. bring Peace on earth, and peace for Israel.

Nevertheless, it seems that the rabbis saw quite a few good tactics in the Book of Matthew. (Incidentally, the alleged Kuzari argument which has been popularized by Orthodox outreach groups would also prove the veracity of Jesus. In Matthew 17, the disciples witnessed Moses and Elijah talking to Jesus. According to the Kuzari principle, witnesses to an event prove the event).

Finally, In Jeremiah 22:24-30, the line of Coniah (Jeconiah) is excluded from gaining the throne of Judah, and this rules out the entire NT  genealogy!

Maimonides proposes an argument by alleged transmission of Oral Law. 

Introduction

1  All the commandments that were given to Moshe at Sinai were given together with their interpretation, as it is written "and I will give thee the Tables of Stone, and the Law, and the Commandment" (Exodus 24,12).  "Law" is the Written Law; and "Commandment" is its interpretation:  We were commanded to fulfill the Law, according to the Commandment.  And this Commandment is what is called the Oral Law.
2  The whole of the Law was written down by Moshe Our Teacher before he died, in his own hand.  He gave a scroll of the Law to each tribe; and he put another scroll by the Ark for a witness, as it is written "take this book of the Law, and put it by the side of the Ark of the Covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee" (Deuteronomy 31,26).
3  But the Commandment, which is the interpretation of the Law--he did not write it down, but gave orders concerning it to the elders, to Yehoshua, and to all the rest of Israel, as it is written "all this word which I command you, that shall ye observe to do . . ." (Deuteronomy 13,1).  For this reason, it is called the Oral Law.
4  Although the Oral Law was not written down, Moshe Our Teacher taught all of it in his court to the seventy elders; and El`azar, Pinehas, and Yehoshua, all three received it from Moshe.  And to his student Yehoshua, Moshe Our Teacher passed on the Oral Law and ordered him concerning it.  And so Yehoshua throughout his life taught it orally.
5  Many elders received it from Yehoshua, and Eli received it from the elders and from Pinehas; Shemuel received it from Eli and his court, and David received it from Shemuel and his court.  Ahiyah the Shilonite was among those who had come out of Egypt, and was a Levite, and had heard it from Moshe, but was young in Moshe's time; and he received it from David and his court.
6  Eliyahu received it from Ahiyah the Shilonite and his court, Elisha received it from Eliyahu and his court, Yehoyada the Priest received it from Elisha and his court, Zecharyahu received it from Yehoyada and his court, Hoshea received it from Zecharyah and his court, Amos received it from Hoshea and his court, Yeshayahu received it from Amos and his court, Michah received it from Yeshayah and his court, Yoel received it from Michah and his court, Nahum received it from Yoel and his court, Havaqquq received it from Nahum and his court, Tsefanyah received it from Havaqquq and his court, Yirmiyah received it from Tsefanyah and his court, Baruch son of Neriyah received it from Yirmiyah and his court, and Ezra and his court received it from Baruch and his court.
7  Ezra's court is called the Men of the Great Assembly, and they were Haggai, Zecharyah, and Mal'achi, and Daniyel Hananyah Mishael and Azaryah, and Nehemyah son of Hachalyah, and Mordochai, and Zerubavel; and many other sages were with them, numbering altogether one hundred twenty elders.  The last of them was Shim`on the Righteous, who was included among the one hundred twenty, and received the Oral Law from all of them; and he was High Priest after Ezra.
8  Antignos of Socho and his court received it from Shim`on the Righteous and his court, Yosef son of Yoezer of Tseredah and Yosef son of Yohanan of Jerusalem and their court received it from Antignos and his court, Yehoshua son of Perahyah and Nittai the Arbelite and their court received it from Yosef and Yosef and their court, Yehudah son of Tabbai and Shim`on son of Shatah and their court received it from Yehoshua and Nittai and their court.  Shemayah and Avtalyon, righteous converts, and their court received it from Yehudah and Shim`on and their court.  Hillel and Shammai and their court received it from Shemayah and Avtalyon and their court, and Rabban Yohanan son of Zakkai and Rabban Shim`on the son of Hillel received it from Hillel and his court.
9  Rabban Yohanan son of Zakkai had five students, and they were the greatest among the sages who received it from him; they were Ribbi Eliezer the Great, Ribbi Yehoshua, Ribbi Yose the Priest, Ribbi Shim`on son of Netan'el, and Ribbi El`azar son of Arach.  Ribbi Aqivah son of Yosef received it from Ribbi Eliezer the Great, and his father, Yosef, was a righteous convert.  Ribbi Yishmael and Ribbi Meir, the son of a righteous convert, received it from Ribbi Aqivah.  Ribbi Meir and his colleagues also received it from Ribbi Yishmael.
10  Ribbi Meir's colleagues were Ribbi Yehudah, Ribbi Yose, Ribbi Shim`on, Ribbi Nehemyah, Ribbi El`azar son of Shammua, Ribbi Yohanan the sandal maker, Shim`on son of Azzai, and Ribbi Hananya son of Teradyon.  Ribbi Aqivah's colleagues also received it from Ribbi Eliezer the Great; and Ribbi Aqivah's colleagues were Ribbi Tarfon, the teacher of Ribbi Yose the Galilean, Ribbi Shim`on son of El`azar, and Ribbi Yohanan son of Nuri.
11  Rabban Gamliel the Elder received it from his father, Rabban Shim`on son of Hillel; his son, Rabban Shim`on, received it from him; his son, Rabban Gamliel, received it from him; and his son, Rabban Shim`on, received it from him.  Ribbi Yehudah son of Rabban Shim`on is called Our Holy Teacher, and he received it from his father, and from Ribbi El`azar son of Shammua, and from Ribbi Shim`on, his colleague.
12  Our Holy Teacher wrote the Mishnah.  From the time of Moshe until Our Holy Teacher, no one had written a work from which the Oral Law was publicly taught.  Rather, in each generation, the head of the court or the prophet of the time wrote down for his private use notes on the traditions he had heard from his teachers, but he taught in public from memory.
13  So too, each individual wrote down, according to his ability, parts of the explanation of the Torah and of its laws that he had heard, as well as the new matters that developed in each generation, which had not been received by tradition, but had been deduced by applying the Thirteen Principles for Interpreting the Torah, and had been agreed upon by the Great Rabbinical Court.  Such had always been done, until the time of Our Holy Teacher.

What is striking, is that Maimonides is using the same structure of argument as Matthew. First, he makes the fallacious and false statement about the “Torah and the Mitzvah”, where he repeats the misrepresentation of Saadia Gaon, where he claimed that the Mitzvah refers to the Oral Law. This is despite the fact that the verse states “and I will give thee the tables of stone, and the law and the commandment, which I have written,”.  This has already been demonstrated in my earlier post:

http://tanakhemet.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/saadia-gaons-textual-proof-crumbles.html

Next, he writes a purported chain of transmission of the “oral law” (which did not exist) despite the fact that the TeNaCh figures did not keep the oral law, or even have it.

For example, Ezra is part of Maimonides’ chain, despite the fact that Ezra and Nechemiah did not have the Etrog, which is an essential part of the alleged oral law. See http://tanakhemet.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/nehemiah-they-found-written-in-law.html

He refers to Shemaiah and Avtalyon as righteous converts, however, they were not even considered righteous by some rabbis.

http://tanakhemet.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/talmudic-whistleblower-akavya-ben.html  As converts, they brought their own Greco-Roman philosophy, which accounts for the Greco-Roman terminology, weights and measures and other perversions of the Torah, in the Mishnah. Thenm he uses similar language about the redactor of the Mishnah, Judah HaNasi, as Matthew does about Jesus.  This is to add the same dramatic and emotive effect on the reader.

Another fallacy is to impose the idea of Rabbinical courts onto he Prophet and Kings, who judged Israel in the Bible.  The Sanhedrin is a Greek word, and an Athenian concept. The Judges of Israel acted through Divine inspiration, and did not sit on a court of Elders to reach their judgements.

Thus deception is the mode of operation of both Matthew and Maimonides – Parallel lies sometimes meet.