Page 102 - A Dissertation for Doctor of Philosophy

believed that a life of holiness was impossible within society; thus they retreated into the

wilderness and formed self-supporting community. 131

Pharisees also interpreted the Torah through the lens of the holiness code. They

attempted to achieve their identity “by radicalizing the Torah in the direction of holiness.” 132

They required those who wanted to be a Pharisee to undertake “the degree of holiness of priest in

the temple.” Likewise, the conventional standards for determining one’s conduct were purity

and holiness. 133 In addition, they employed “social and religious ostracism” to the

nonobservant. 134

Against this Pharisaic interpretation of the Law, Jesus translated the Law according to the

“mercy code,” and oral law. 135 In the Lukan summary of the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus

preached, “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful” (Lk. 6:36). 136 The heart of Jesus’

interpretation and ethics was the Imitatio Dei, the imitation of God. 137

131 Borg, New Vision, 88.

132
Ibid.
133
For an example, see Mk. 7:1-5, “Now when the Pharisees and some of scribes…. They
noticed that some of his disciples were eating with defiled hands, that is, without washing
them…. So the Pharisees and scribes asked him, ‘Why do your disciples not live according to the
tradition of the elders, but eat with defiled hands?’”

134
Borg, New Vision, 89.
135
Borg, Conflict, 125. Young, Theologian, 106. He accounts that “the Oral Torah was
not a rigid legalistic code dominated by one single interpretation. The oral tradition allowed a
certain amount of latitude and flexibility. In fact, the open forum of the oral Torah invited
vigorous debate and even encouraged diversity of thoughts and imaginative creativity.”

136
For more examples, see Lk. 15:20 and Lk. 10:33.

137
Borg, Conflict, 125.