How do Jewish scholars differ from Christian scholars in their approach to the Tanakh?
Jewish scholars use the method of Pardes which is an acronym for Pashat, Remez, Drash, Sod. Pashat is the literal interpretation. Christians have learned much from Jewish expositors in this. Rabbinic exposition of the literal meaning is not much different than Christian.
Remez looks at hints and follows their lead. For instance, Jesus's quotes of OT scripture while on the cross would be considered mere pointers to the whole context of the quoted passage. Generally, eschatological biases permit Christians to chop up the referenced scriptures into present and future portions.
Drash means to compare and contrast similar passages. For instance, when water is parted for Moses, Joshua, Elijah and Elisha, they are seen as transparent overlays of the same story and context can be moved from one story to the next. Christians might notice similarities and differences between them, but sharing context is nearly unheard of.
Sod is the hidden meaning. Jewish interpretation of the sodim leads into Kabbalah. For Christians sod is about Jesus, e.g. in the saying "When you see the white rock, don't say Water-water", using the methods of pardes upon the New and Old Testament together, Jesus is the white rock, and "Water-water" means the word of God in heaven and on earth. The warning in the parable of the four rabbis is followed by penalties.
Christians generally note the odd usage that the NT authors put to OT scripture, and it is the source of much debate under the name of sensus plenior. Many modern theologians have rejected the idea of hidden meaning as a response to much bad allegory. However, Clement seems to have retained a knowledge of it, and more recently Macintosh came very close to seeing the hidden since his methods indicate his ability to share context in Drash. Some discussions on intertextuality come close to describing sod, such as Jeffrey Meyer's description of Mary's encounter with Jesus at the tomb as the fulfillment of prophecies in the Song of Solomon. http://web.me.com/jeffmeyers/Site_3/The_Gardener_&_his_Beloved.html
from [1]
splenior May 9, 2015 at 6:55 pm Reply
- “When you see the white stone, do not say ‘Water, water.'” — admonition to Jews seeking to learn to read the scripture using Pardes.
- When something is said twice, it means “in heaven and earth”.
- ‘White’ represents holiness.
- ‘Water’ is the word of God.
- And stone אבן is father ‘ab’ אב and son ‘ben’ בן joined. The stone that was split is a :picture of the cross when the Father and the Son were divided.
- The admonition was written by rabbis who did not want Jews to see Jesus in their own :scripture. So when they see the Holy Father/Son they are not to proclaim him to be the :living Torah/Word, in heaven and earth.
- The admonition is followed by threats should they choose to proclaim Christ.
- Dr. Eli Lizorkin-Eyzenberg May 10, 2015 at 8:46 am Reply
- Well… :-). Not really :-). First of all, the text Bavli (Haggigah 14b) does not say “When you see the white stone”, instead it says literally (I bolded the actual text in Aramaic):
- “When you come to the pure marble stones”.
- ורבי עקיבא אמר להם ר”ע כשאתם מגיעין אצל אבני שיש טהור אל תאמרו מים מים
- Second point while you are correct that the rest of the Talmud’s page are about warning fellow rabbinic Jews not to engage in the Christian claims about Jesus, you are not correct about the stone being made up of two words (Av and Ben). The word stone (AVEN) is just that a word that is NOT made up of two (it is a not a compound word). There are many words in Hebrew that only sound like that but upon closer examination are not really 2-in-1 kind of words. We should be very careful not to read in the meaning into any text (such as what I think you did with the father and stone). Our theologies affect us more than we can imagine. Mine included. Let’s keep thinking together.
- splenior May 10, 2015 at 4:24 pm Reply
- According to Rabbi Ginsburg, Hebrew letters have strokes with metaphoric meaning which combine into letters each having metaphoric meaning, which combine into two-letter sub-roots called gates, which then combine into larger roots and words. Each meaning is derived from the combination of underlying metaphors.
- The meaning of a gate has a reversal (not an opposite as the western mind would think.)
- שיש comes from the gate שש which means ‘bleach’ or ‘;white’. It is unchangeable since it is the same when the letters are reversed. The ש has a metaphor of the Spirit of God which returns to God having given life. Marble is the created thing which is white, or bleached.
- Even Strong identified שיש as coming from an unused root meaning to bleach.
- Rabbi Ginsburg seems to appreciate the breakdown of bereshit:
- ב – a revelation to man:
- ר – God revealed
- א – to that which he created in silence (or that he spoke and created the heavens and the earth)
- ש – that when he spoke there were two responses (heavens and the earth or ‘his word did not return void)
- י – what he conceived before the creation.
- ת – was finished.
- Rabbi Foreman, before he passed also approved of such methods.
- Rabbi Benjamin Blech also has a series of Books, where he does similar interpretation.
- Since Jesus said that all the scriptures spoke of him, isn’t it fair to impose his theology on them? The Rabbis say that the scripture is full of riddle, and we must wrestle with the answers for ourselves. But they refuse to look at Jesus who is the fulfillment of the dark sayings of God.
- Thank you for being accessible. I enjoy your writing.
splenior May 10, 2015 at 5:07 pm Reply
- Ginsberg also says that the sodim (hidden meanings) speak of the Messiah. He simply does not agree that Jesus is the Messiah.
Dr. Eli Lizorkin-Eyzenberg May 10, 2015 at 9:35 pm Reply
- Sure (about being available :-) and thanks for your kind comments that you enjoy the writing.) About honorable Rabbi Ginsburg and other kabalists like him (with all due respect) are I think truly mistaken and misled by other teachers of Hassidut that went before them. (providing we are talking about the same rabbi) :-).
- I do not accept this way of interpretation. I consider it dangerous and unacceptable for several reasons: 1) We do not see this kind of interpretation practices in Scriptures (limited use of gematria is far as NT writers went for example) and 2) Once this method is adopted for interpretation it is amazing how many things can then be read into almost any word. If we do not stick to the grammatical meaning of the word, anything goes. In other-words when we hold a hammer in our hands, everything begins to look like a nail.
- So, I would not go by Rabbi’s Ginsburg’s interpretive methods. They are as I said simply mistaken and unscriptural. The fact that other Rabbis Blech and Foreman approved of such a methods only makes more of the same weak point that was already made by referring to the authority of rabbi Ginsburg.
- You write towards the end of your comment: “Since Jesus said that all the scriptures spoke of him, isn’t it fair to impose his theology on them?
- Answer: No I think, in fact, it is not fair :-). The second does not follow from the first! I think we must look to Jesus on in all Scriptures but not using methods that are highly speculative and questionable. We must learn how the NT writers did it and learn from them!
- You write: “The Rabbis say that the scripture is full of riddle, and we must wrestle with the answers for ourselves. But they refuse to look at Jesus who is the fulfillment of the dark sayings of God.””
- A.: Answering this statement is complicated by me disagreeing with you about the methods :-). I would recommend listening to Prof. Boyarin’s lectures on this very text you brought up earlier (four rabbinical figures entering pardes) on our website. If you are looking for incredible Jewish teacher. Daniel Boayrin should get the priority!
- Look for the Library in top menue. Then look for AUDIO and look for Professors Boyarin’s lectures.
- Or click here to get there directly http://jewishstudies.eteacherbiblical.com/media-center/ (they are second from the top). Enjoy! What is your name by the way? I feel bad about talking with you without knowing how to address you properly :-). Dr. Eli
splenior May 11, 2015 at 1:09 am
- I am Bob, and happy to meet you.
- I suppose this is a topic that we will have to agree to disagree on.
- The mystery is something that has been hidden from the beginning.
- It is likely that Jesus taught how to see it when he was 12.
- During the next 17 years they perverted his teaching in order to hide that he was the Messiah. He calls them liars, not misguided teachers.
- He said the Kingdom of heaven was like leaven, which he used as ‘teaching’.
- And after he said he would give the keys to the kingdom, he showed the the pictures of the cross in the OT.
- He said the teachers would not enter in, nor would they permit others to enter. They had perverted the teaching so they would not see him as the Messiah.
- Jerusalem means ‘teaching of peace’ and the New Jerusalem means the New teaching of peace. Jesus ushered this in when he said “You have heard it said… but I say…”
- Then the Bereans were able to see the mystery as they challenged Paul’s testimony.
- Then the Jews warned against applying Pardes to Christ.
- And modern Jews tell us that the hidden meaning still speaks of Messiah.
- Pardes is not Kabbalah. Pardes is simply interpreting scripture literally (pashat), by reference (remez), by comparison (drash) which reveals the hidden mystery, which they say is Messiah.
- Kabbalah was invented to poison the well of pardes so that Jews would not see Christ in the scriptures when applying pardes. The warning is evidence that Pardes must reveal him, or there would be no need for the warning.
- When pardes is properly applied, every verse of every chapter of every book participates in a hidden picture of Christ which is validated by the NT. This is certainly not Kabbalah. Just because the rabbis apply it in a free-for-all fashion, does not make it dangerous for Christians when the rules are applied. When something is a metaphor, like garments being works, it must be that in every place. And the sod must speak of Christ in a way that is validated by the NT. The rabbis have no such controls. Rabbis have many answers to the riddles because they do not have THE answer which is Christ.
- However since you have already decided against it, showing you that in fact Jesus and the apostles actually did use it, will not get a fair hearing. And I suppose since you consider it dangerous, that a public discussion of it on your blog would be inappropriate, however I am happy to chat with you privately. I think you have access to my email through the blog.
- I would love to show you the birth of Christ in Gen 38, and how Paul teaches us to see it in Acts 12. The source of the prophecy that Jesus would be called a Nazarene, and how Matthew teaches us to find it. John’s use of pardes in John 1:1-4 as he interprets the first three words of Genesis 1.1.
- I believe I can show each method of Pardes being used by all of the NT authors. Is there a private forum where I can show you the evidence?
- Either way, the Jewish admonition against saying “water, water” supports your speculation that the white stone is Christ. Thanks again.
Dr. Eli Lizorkin-Eyzenberg May 11, 2015 at 6:13 am
- Agreeing to disagree seems to be in order. Blessings and much peace, Dr. Eli
