rosewalk at concentric.net
Sun Sep 3 01:11:14 EDT 2006
I don't know if we are having a problem with terminology - ie that
the Torah didn't call it a "Sanhedrin"
Or a disbelief in the historic records that the Mishna and Talmud
recorded for us, including the records of where it was moved to,
under whose leadership, who were the heads, some of whom were Judges,
when the heads were "pairs" - nesiim and avot beit din, etc.
We even know the NAMES of who headed various Sanhedrins.
King David, by the way, WAS a prophet, and ALSO the head of the
Sanhedrin of his time.
What, do you think any, all or some of these facts were made up?
Translated from the Talmud:
The Great (Sanhedrin) consisted of seventy-one, and the small of
twenty-three. Whence do we deduce that the great council must be of
seventy-one? From [Num. xi. 16]: "Gather unto me seventy men." And
add Moses, who was the head of them--hence seventy-one? And whence do
we deduce that a small one, must be twenty-three? From [ibid. xxxv.
24 and 25]: "The congregation shall judge"; "And the congregation
shall save." 1 We see that one congregation judges, and the other
congregation saves-hence there are twenty; as a congregation consists
of no less than ten persons, and this is deduced from [ibid. xiv.
27], "To this evil congregation," which was of the ten spies, except
Joshua and Caleb. And whence do we deduce that three more are needed?
From [Ex. xxiii. 2]: Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do
evil"--from which we infer that you shall follow them to do good. But
if so, why is it written at the end of the same verse, "Incline after
the majority, to wrest judgment"? 2 This means, the inclination to
free the man must not be similar to the inclination to condemn; as to
condemn a majority of two is needed, while to free, the majority of
one suffices. And a court must not consist of an even number, as, if
their opinion is halved, no verdict can be established; therefore one
more must be added. Hence it is of twenty-three.
More information about the b-hebrew