Good Morning, I have somewhat an unrelated question. When you look at that book of John chapter 5:
Now there is in Jerusalem by the Sheep Gate a pool, which is called in Hebrew, Bethesda,[a] having five porches. 3 In these lay a great multitude of sick people, blind, lame, paralyzed, waiting for the moving of the water. 4 For an angel went down at a certain time into the pool and stirred up the water; then whoever stepped in first, after the stirring of the water, was made well of whatever disease he had.
This always looked to me as a superstitious belief. Why would G-d decide to send an angle, every now and then to stir that water to heal the first person that goes into the pool. Now, I do believe that the writer of the new testament wrote somewhat an accurate description of what happened there. There must have been a pool, where people though there was some angle who passed and heal the sick. As I understand G-d, that would make no sense though. G-d won’t send an angle on a pool to heal people. Am I right on my assessment? Is there other such superstition in Jewish writing, that could contradict my assessment of the book of John?
Google the angel Raphael. He’s not mentioned by name in Tanakh but he’s discussed in the Midrash and kabbalistic books.
As per Chabad, Raphael is the one that brings healing. So logically speaking, if someone pray to G-d, then G-d would send that messenger to heal him. The recipient of the healing would thank G-d and would not know that a messenger was in between. I guess I don’t have problem with that. I still have some issues with John. Would G-d send an angle to a special place for healing. If miracles happen somewhere, it will finish in a place of unacceptable worship (in my opinion). Alan, what do you think about John 5?
“Would G-d send an angle to a special place for healing. If miracles happen somewhere, it will finish in a place of unacceptable worship (in my opinion). Alan, what do you think about John 5?”
I agree with you RT!
Thank. That begs the question, how much of the NT narrative can be trusted. Someone told me I had no more reason to trust the author of the Talmud than of the NT. I mention that I cannot trust at least some aspect of the NT. I definitively cannot believe the resurrection account. But what about the miracles (most should be doubted in my opinion), how much of Jesus speaches can we say came from him, if the NT was written years after the actual speech was made?
If you’re still interested in knowing which NT passages are trustworthy, I recommend contacting CP.
Not that interested, but have been accused of double standard. I am listening Rabbi B.’ Hijacking Rabbinical writing right now, I guess it will help me to answer those kind of question… Many Christians see the Talmud and rabbinic writing in bad view, and accuse those who follow Rabbinic Judaism of blindly believing the Talmud and rabbinic writing, while rejecting the NT and doubting the accounts of the narrative of the NT. How would you answer such thing?
The Talmud is all about everybody arguing in order to get the most accurate picture of what the law is. It’s all about people saying what they heard from their teachers and comparing to what others heard from their teachers. Most laws are not disputed though. Most disputes are over details of laws. Jews have an unbroken tradition from teacher to student going all the way back to Moses. And in every generation there have always been 1000’s of students and teachers involved in clarifying the law as passed down from one Sanhedrin to the next. It’s a different story when it comes to Midrash. Midrash is not law.
Pingback: Diminishing References and Dr. Brown’s Staggering Mistake – Part 3 | 1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources