In the history of the Church, we see how Jesus’ teachings on love, spiritual growth, and nonviolence were buried under complex doctrines of the Trinity, atonement, predestination, clerical hierarchy, and rituals ranging from infant baptism to indulgences and crusades. How could Jesus preach “love your enemies” when later Christians killed heretics and infidels? One might therefore assume a similar transformation in the case of Moses, especially since the Torah makes no clear distinction between revelation and later interpolation. The teachings of Moses were distorted and transformed into what is now called “Judaism.” This assertion finds support from several sources—historical-critical, textual, philosophical, and even the Gospel texts themselves.
The conflict between Jesus and the Jews of his day concerns the understanding of the Mosaic Law. Apparently, Jesus believed that the teachings of Moses existed in a simpler, more ethically oriented form, but were then expanded by priestly editors. History says that this happened during the Babylonian captivity and later. Jesus insisted that the priests and scribes had distorted the teachings of Moses. The question is, how much was the distortion? It was very significant.
According to the documentary theory, the Torah consists of texts written by different authors in different centuries. The most ritual and legally detailed sections (for example, Leviticus) belong to the priestly source (P), dating from the 6th–5th centuries BCE, that is, much later than Moses. As for the supposedly “unclean food,” we see discrepancies in the lists of unclean animals in Deuteronomy 14 and Leviticus 11. Moses himself ate with non-Jews (for example, with his father-in-law Jethro, a priest of Midian) — and there was no indication that it was Moses who demanded kosher food or that there was a violation of the laws. We read the words of Jesus: “Nothing that enters a man from outside can defile him… for it does not enter his heart, but his belly….” The evangelist adds: “Thus He declared all foods clean.” This was a direct polemic with the Pharisaic and priestly tradition, not with the “teaching of Moses” as such. Jesus represented the “original prophetic spirit of Israel,” and his position suggested that the dietary taboos were a later distortion of what Moses taught. Archaeological finds in highland Palestine (12th–10th centuries BCE) show that the early Israelites ate pork, suggesting that the taboo was not universal. Food taboos often arise in closed societies as a way of separating themselves from “others.” They may be a political and cultural tool rather than a divine requirement.
What else besides the laws on clean and unclean food did the priests and scribes add to the Torah? All their insertions were part of historical revisions. Deuteronomy from chapter twelve to twenty-six is a codified version of the law that appeared under King Josiah (seventh century BCE), as part of a religious reform. The text itself (Deuteronomy 12:8) admits: “let us not do as we do today, each one according to his own judgment.” This was a normal religious reform, not prophecies or simply “a reminder of Moses.” And the main addition of the priests concerned sacrifices.
It has long been noted that the Prophets of Israel spoke out against ritualism. Isaiah, Hosea, Amos often said that God does not want sacrifices and rituals, but wants mercy, justice and purity of heart: “I am not pleased with your sacrifices… stop bringing empty gifts… learn to do good, pursue righteousness…” (Isaiah 1:11). This contradicts the detailed cult system of Leviticus, as if there were two parallel religions: one is prophetic and ethical, the second is ritual and ceremonial. Sacrifices become the center of the cult precisely with the appearance of the Temple in Jerusalem, not in the time of Moses, but in the time of the kings. What was added by the priests: detailed rituals of sacrifices for sin, for guilt, burnt offerings, peace offerings, etc. (especially in the book of Leviticus). A detailed description of who, how and where makes sacrifices, with what animals and at what stage of life. Moses spent a lot of time in the desert and generally outside the temple – the ritual, if there was one, could not have been so complex.
In order to centralize power and formalize religion, the priests introduced harsh criminal laws (e.g., death penalty for minor offenses). Stoning for blasphemy, for breaking the Sabbath, for homosexual acts, for disobeying parents, numerous corporal punishments including cutting off the hand, death penalty, and so on were added. Why it is doubtful that God gave these instructions: Deuteronomy and Exodus have different versions of punishments for the same crime; the prophets and Jesus focus on mercy and repentance, not bloody retribution. Such severe punishments are typical of patriarchal agrarian societies. They served to strengthen the state of Israel, and were given by the priests with a state mindset, and not by God through Moses.
The regulations on ceremonial purity and “unclean” states are also late additions. We see long chapters on when a person is “unclean” – after childbirth, menstruation, touching a dead person, leprosy, etc. We read about “cleansing” rites, bathing, offerings for purification. Why this is questionable: these regulations are not directly related to morality, but rather to the ritual culture and fears of antiquity. Jesus openly violated the laws of uncleanness: he touched lepers, a bleeding woman, dead people. The system of various taboos introduced by the priests also served to strengthen the state religion and consolidated the people into one whole.
What else was added to the Torah by people? A complex system of holidays and pilgrimages. Mandatory pilgrimages to Jerusalem, precise dates of holidays, how exactly to celebrate them (Pesach, Sukkot, Shavuot). These prescriptions are especially emphasized in Deuteronomy and Leviticus. Why it is doubtful: in the desert conditions of the Exodus from Egypt, a formalized liturgy hardly existed. Holidays could have been agrarian customs that were later “sanctified” and attributed to Moses.
Female subordination and patriarchal norms: laws regarding “virginity testing,” selling a daughter, purification of a woman after the birth of a son/daughter. Women were stripped of their rights and were effectively considered property. These norms may well have been a reflection of Middle Eastern culture rather than divine revelation. Jesus’ teaching is much more egalitarian and allows for an active role for women in spiritual life.
It is necessary to mention the concentration of the cult in one temple and the power of the priests. It was forbidden to build altars outside Jerusalem. Only the descendants of Aaron – the priests, the Levites could serve at the Temple. However, Moses was rather a spiritual authority, and his leadership did not depend on the temple structure. In the original texts it is clear that sacrifices were brought on simple altars (for example, at an oak tree, in tents). Jesus denied this concentration of religious consciousness on the Jerusalem temple, for which the priests especially disliked him. Worship of the temple brought fabulous money to the priests.
Finally, the religious elite of Israel benefited from nationalistic, ethnocentric laws. Prohibitions against intermarriage with foreigners were added. In the context of the formation of the state of Israel, the priests glorified the destruction of “all the nations of Canaan,” without compassion. However, this contradicts the prophetic concept of the God of all nations. Jesus, Paul, and the prophets (e.g., Jonah) expand the boundaries of mercy and revelation beyond Israel. Jesus repeatedly condemned Jewish nationalism, saying that other nations would take Israel’s place in the service of God and man.
It was this conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees over the understanding of the law of Moses that became the stumbling block and the reason for Jesus’ execution. Jesus understood the law of Moses without any of the later, soulless and often inhumane insertions of the priests and scribes. Moreover, these insertions are not in the later commentaries on the Old Testament, but in the Torah itself. As soon as Jesus voiced a more spiritual understanding of Moses, the priests immediately considered Him an “enemy of the state”, an enemy of Israel and Moses. The main tragedy of Israel and Judaism remains that they never began to search for the true meaning of the teachings of Moses and continue to use a distorted version of the teachings of their ancient legislator.
Follow Jesus Christ 
Leave a comment