Matthew vs Paul: Signs Of Tension

[Secret Alias]

Yeah but give me a fucking break. Like anyone or any culture came up with this doctrine ON THEIR OWN. It's like the horny partner claiming that the lack of sex in their relationship was a mutual 'agreement' on both their parts. The reason the rabbinic tradition came up with this ruling is that IT WAS FORCED UPON THEM. Plain and simple. There is no dependence of Matthew on 'Pharisaic doctrine.' Judah the Prince was the biggest sycophant, bum buddy of the Emperor in the history of Judaism. That the rabbinic literature turns this around and makes it as if the Emperor was bending over for Judah is ridiculous. The whole tradition was on its knees since the destruction. The idea that the Sadducees were 'collaborators' and the tradition which came from Yavneh wasn't is another a joke. Any Jewish tradition that was sanctioned by the state (which means any Jewish tradition that survived) was actively engaged in prostituting the Jewish religion. Not surprisingly it was Judah who first introduced calling God 'the cosmocrator' or its equivalent. This is a joke. Jewish people spend all this effort making it seem as the Imperial sanctified Christianity was qualitatively different from Imperial sanctified Judaism. No difference between whores. One sucks your cock the other let's you have full service. But they're both whores.

[John2]

Any Jewish tradition that was sanctioned by the state (which means any Jewish tradition that survived) was actively engaged in prostituting the Jewish religion.

I agree, actually.

I'm not suggesting that respecting the laws of ruling states is a Pharisaic invention, just noting that Rom. 13 appears to be in line with the rabbinic position (which makes sense given that Paul had been a Pharisee), and I don't think it's a coincidence that the versions of the religions that survived (Pauline Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism) have this position.

[John2]

I'm actually getting more respect for this Pharisaic position (to whatever extent it was imposed on them) as time goes by (like I had when I began to practice Judaism and didn't know about anything but the rabbinic version(s) of it). Roth's articles on the DSS, for example, which I recently read, gave me an even better appreciation for the awkward position (politically speaking) that the Pharisees were in. They had to create/adapt/accept a version of Judaism that could exist with political reality while dealing with fanatics like the Fourth Philosophy, Christians and the DSS sect.