Reassessing Torah

Re assessing Torah In Matthew 19 a Jewish upstart from Nazareth creates a legal ruling if we were to accept it (On the subject of Divorce so I guess we will ignore it) which is over and above the Hebrew Torah and again if we were to accept it would make this nobody Jew (Who soon after was crucified) the ultimate legal judge. Now the reason why this intrigues me is that when I read in Hebrew looking up and considering every word the Torah I did not find a final for all time complete everything you need to know document- Rather the books from Exodus to Joshua including an Arabic contribution by Balaam- they read better as a travel dairy and community record with legal discoveries and rulings emerging when the subject or events make that relevant with the most interesting Hebrew word- translated by others as ‘Judgment’ better describing ‘decision making’ putting the power back in the hands of Torah readers to go on and live their own travel adventure knowing that the process is ongoing; Rather than as silly Americans would have it-10 Commandments down on the court house wall. Thus just as Einstein comes along when previous centuries of scientists had postulated that the universe operates on Unchanging Laws and it is up to science to find and then use those laws- No! This kicked out of Germany by Adolf Hitler Jewish Professor says the universe is ‘Relative’. OK Definitive and final; or Relative and relationship with the creator of the universe, with a Jew from Nazareth who uses the sacred name as if he is it? You can see here the capacity for quite a good religious argument. So what? Well in much the same way Alain Clement goes on to show how the American people have treated their own ‘sacred’ Constitution in much the same way that Orthodox Jews have as being unmovable and eternal- when we outside observers are more inclined from a wide ranging view of human history and cultures to see potential flaws in USA and the faith put in their system as being delusional! You see the capacity here for a good political argument. Well you the reader can decide! USA forever? Still as a result opposite to that which actually took place in the United States might be expected, for what restraint could and abstract form of legitimacy exert based as it was on antiquated texts and outmoded institutions? Raising the question, however only serves to underline that it is totally irrelevant in the American context. For an American the Constitution is not the product but the source of Legitimacy. It requires no justification. What derives from it is legitimated, not merely legal, and therein resides its uniqueness. The Constitution is not just an historical document doomed to obsolescence, not the text of a ‘social contract’ subject to repeal, but the manifestation of a Revelation, the same time the Tables of the Law and the Ark of the Covenant, the final justification of an all encompassing system.