Can someone help me learn how to use these resources? :)(Jewish studies)

I think Mike Heiser's new book on Angels that came out today would shed some light on this subject for you.

https://www.logos.com/product/148914/angels-what-the-bible-really-says-about-gods-heavenly-host 

2. Bearing Witness to God’s Decrees

In addition to participating in divine decisions, members of God’s heavenly host also bear witness to God’s decrees. We have already encountered two such instances. In Job 38:4–7, the morning stars/sons of God bear witness to the majesty of the creation event. In Genesis 1:26 God announced to the assembled council host his decision to create humankind. That the purpose of the declaration “let us create” was to announce intention, not solicit help in creating, is evident in Genesis 1:27, where the verbs of creation are all grammatically singular. The members of the heavenly host perform an endorsement role, not in terms of authorizing God’s decision, but rather validating or confirming its goodness, wisdom, and desirability.16
Perhaps less well known, but just as transparent in the biblical text, is the idea that the law was delivered by angels (Acts 7:53; Gal 3:19; Heb 2:2). This belief derives from the Septuagint version of Deuteronomy 33:1–4, which has a multitude of divine beings at Sinai (v. 2), whereas the Hebrew Masoretic text does not. The Septuagint version of Deuteronomy 33 has angels (its translation of qedōshı̂m, “holy ones,” in v. 2) accompanying God when he gave the Law to Israel. The Masoretic text instead suggests that the “holy ones” are the Israelites receiving the law.
The biblical text makes it clear that the giving of the law was a covenantal act between Yahweh and Israel (Exod 19:5–6; 24:1–8). Members of Yahweh’s assembly are present to bear witness to the covenant enactment. Miller again summarizes the implication well: “The rule of the cosmos is in the hands of Yahweh, but the context in which that rule takes place is the activity of the council where Yahweh’s decrees directing the human community and the divine world are set forth and through whom they are communicated or enacted.”21 The ultimate expression of this idea was the Sinai covenant between Yahweh and his own people.

Michael S. Heiser, Angels: What the Bible Really Says about God’s Heavenly Host (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2018), 37–38.

Mike Tourangeau said:

I am not familiar with Jewish literature (Talmud etc) but I want to be. So to this end I purchased the Jewish Studies XL package for a great deal.

Now I would like to learn how the Jews understood the giving of the Torah and angels. (Acts 7:38+ Vs 53) (Gal 3:19) What set me off on it was the author of Hebrews showing how Christ is greater than the angels.

I read from the Legends of the Jews how Moses went into heaven etc. Is that it? How would you go about researching this? Thanks in advance for any help  

Hi

Your question is the sort of question that comes up most often from my students when first considering where to start learning about Judaism, and unfortunately, it's not an easy question to answer. The problem is that you cannot study Judaism - both Ancient and Modern - as if it is a homogeneous whole. There is not one, single, agreed upon way to be Jewish. Ever since the return from the Babylonian exile in 535 BCE, Judaism has splintered off into many different divisions and factions, with some very serious disagreements about what shape and form Israel's obedience to God should take. This is not to say there was not still a solid core of beliefs and practices which on the whole united them together as "Jews", with a shared historic tradition reaching back to the time of Abraham. But that shared tradition uniting them as one people under God cannot mask how serious the disagreements were.

Today's Judaism still reflects that fractured nature of their faith. There are currently 5 types of Judaism in the world today: Haredi (Hasidic) Judaism (what is often pejoratively referred to as "Ultra-Orthodox" Judaism); Orthodox Judaism; Conservative Judaism; Reform Judaism; and Progressive Judaism. And I'm not even counting the other marginal splinter groups such as the Karaites, the Samaritans, and the Haymanot.

Back in the first century, there were major divisions that lead to fractious in-fighting, and ultimately, even war (the Maccabean war was essential a major disagreement over whether or not they should resist cultural assimilation from Hellenism and who was qualified to be High Priest).

When I first started learning about Judaism some 40 years ago, I followed the then "received wisdom" of the time: If you wanted to know about the Pharisees, you learnt Rabbinic Judaism. So, that's what I did. I spent 3 years in Israel at a Yeshiva, learning Mishnah, Talmud, and Midrashim. 

This is because for at least a couple of hundred years, due mostly to the dominance and control of Rabbinic Judaism, it was ubiquitous belief that the traditions of the Pharisees were passed on to the Rabbis, in an unbroken chain of tradition reaching as far back to Sinai itself.

However, starting in the early '70s, principally through the influence of the school of Jacob Neusner, the modern scholarly study of Judaism today now realises that this is simply not the case. From the time of its birth in the Second Century CE, Rabbinic Judaism has instigated some very important innovations in how the study of Torah was conducted, none of which can be traced back to the First Century. Whereas it is true that the Mishnah and the Talmud do preserve some traditions and practices which reach back to the Pharisees, the vast majority of the traditions, practices, and laws (technically referred to as "halakhah") that you find in the Mishnah and Talmud were much later than the First Century.- most of it, in fact, originating in the Geonic period (roughly 600 - 1000 CE). It has been estimated that as little as 20% of what is found in Mishnah and Talmud can be reliably traced back to the First Century CE.

I wish I had known this when I started my Rabbinic training. I now know that the best sources for First Century Judaism are found in what is technically referred to as "Second Temple" literature - the Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Indeed, preeminently, the Dead Sea Scrolls. I became a "Scrolls scholar" some 30 years ago when I first became aware of how important the Scrolls are to our knowledge of Early Christianity: it is by far and away the single most important source for our understanding of what traditions and beliefs helped shape and give birth to the early Jesus movement.You see, Christianity and the sectarians at Qumran had a common, shared tradition-history. This was a peculiar and particular form of Apocalyptic Judaism, which had a very pronounced Eschatology (i.e. the doctrine of the "Last Days") and Angelology. It is this common tradition-history that accounts for the striking similarities in both language and ideas between them. Not, I hasten to add,  because either Jesus or John the Baptist shared time with the Essenes at Qumran. A theory which continues to rear its ugly head every now and then.

So, I am sorry to be the bearer of bad news. Your purchase of the Logos Jewish Studies XL package will only introduce you to Rabbinic Judaism. If you don't mind studying it on its own terms, that will be all fine and dandy. But if you want to get an introduction to the Judaism of the Second Temple Period, you're right out of luck. 

However, don't despair. Logos do some fine Dead Sea Scrolls resources. I've purchased most of what they have to offer, and whereas they aren't in the same league as the E J Brill Dead Sea Scrolls Electronic Library, for the money you pay to Logos, it an't half bad! I recommend the Logos Qumran Biblical Dead Sea Scrolls Database, for an actual study edition itself (i.e. the texts themselves); accompanied by "The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation", by Martin Abegg, for the translations.

And if you want to want to study Second Temple Judaism and the birth of Christianity principally through the prism of the Dead Sea Scrolls, I highly recommend Professor Lawrence Schiffman's "Qumran and Jerusalem: Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the History of Judaism".

[quote]

The Talmud (Hebrew for “study”) is the record of rabbinic teachings that spans a period of more than six hundred years, beginning in the first century C.E. and continuing through the sixth and seventh centuries C.E. The Talmud is actually made up of two separate works: The Mishnah, primarily a compilation of Jewish laws, written in Hebrew and edited around the year 200 C.E. in Israel; and the Gemara, the rabbinic commentaries and discussions on the Mishnah, written in Hebrew and Aramaic, emanating from both Babylonia and Israel over the next three hundred to five hundred years. In actuality, there are two Talmuds—the Yerushalmi (the “Jerusalem” Talmud, or to be more geographically precise, the Talmud of the Land of Israel), and the Bavli (the “Babylonian” Talmud). The Bavli was edited after the Yerushalmi and is much more widely known, studied, and quoted. The Babylonian Talmud is generally printed in twenty folio (or oversize) volumes. It contains over 5,400 pages, and is composed of more than 2,500,000 words. There are many people who study a page of Talmud every day; it takes them over seven years to complete the entire work.

Katz, M., & Schwartz, G. (1998). Swimming in the sea of the Talmud: lessons for everyday living (pp. 9–10). Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society.

Also, https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/mishnah/ 

Mike Tourangeau said:

Is this distinct from Talmud? 

As to Logos resources, they are separate resources. Sorry, this was incorrect. I was going from poor memory and should have checked or kept shut. The Talmud resource does include the text of the Mishnah.

Mike Tourangeau said:

Now I would like to learn how the Jews understood the giving of the Torah and angels. (Acts 7:38+ Vs 53) (Gal 3:19) What set me off on it was the author of Hebrews showing how Christ is greater than the angels.

Be careful about the term "angels"...it doesn't necessarily refer to angels. The word just means "messengers" and not all messengers are after the "angel" kind. Yeishuua` is an angel...He is the Messenger of the Covenant (Mal. 3:1), but the same verse shows that John the Baptist is an angel, too...the messenger preparing the way before Him.

Great history lesson David thank you.

Mike Tourangeau said:

If this is true I wonder if returning the set and buying the Mishnah and the" Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism" separately would be more helpful?

In my own opinion, certainly the Dictionary would be more helpful to NT studies. Most of the collection you've purchased is designed for Rabbinic studies in the Medieval period. In my view, even the Mishnah is a little late to be of primary value to New Testament studies. (I'm not saying it's irrelevant, but the literature which is more contemporary to the period is more relevant.) Logos has a wealth of primary literature from early Judaism in English translation. I would suggest the following as a good foundation of primary literature (in order of priority):

1. Lexham English Septuagint (which includes the apocyrpha)
2. Charlesworth's Old Testament Pseudepigrapha
3. The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition
4. Josephus

To put all that together and make sense of it, you'll need a guide. I'd suggest either Nickelsburg, Heyler, or Willitts' mobile ed course.

If that's too expensive, you may want to buy the guide first, then use that to guide you into which areas you're most interested in.

PS - If you buy the dictionary you might be able to manage without a guide, because the first part of the dictionary includes 300 large pages on subjects such as the Jewish Scriptures, apocrypha and pseudepigrapha, the DSS, etc.

[quote]

If I understand right the Mishnah is NOT included in either of the Talmud I have and the collection is focused on "Rabbinic Judaism" which is very different from the Second Temple Judaism that influenced the NT. 

If this is true I wonder if returning the set and buying the Mishnah and the" Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism" separately would be more helpful??

The first part of what you said is wrong. The second is right:

1. As I said, the Mishnah is INCLUDED in the Talmud as its principle text. It is what the Talmudic discussions are all about. They are trying to explain what the Mishnah text is saying. In a way, possessing a copy of the Talmud obviates the need to have a separate edition of the Mishnah because you have a copy of the Mishnah included as standard within the Talmud itself. 

2. Yes: Rabbinic Judaism cannot be simply equated with Second Temple Judaism as it was as short a time ago as 40 years. It is very different from some forms of Second Temple Judaism. There were important "parties" (Josephus uses the word "sect", but it is fraught with misunderstanding so best not to use it) in the Second Temple period, "parties" such as the Sadducees, Samaritans, and Boethusians (a break-away party from the Sadducees), which were nothing like what became Rabbinic Judaism.

Yet, on the other hand, Rabbinic Judaism has roots which are firmly planted in the Second Temple Period. For example, Rabbinic Judaism shares a common tie with the sectarians who made up the community we now know as "the Dead Sea Sect" at Qumran (just off the shores of the Dead Sea itself) that the written Torah had to be supplemented with a separate collection of interpretations on the laws found in the written Torah (what I previously referred to as the "oral" Torah). What separates the Rabbis from the Essenes (if, indeed, we can make a simple equation of "Essene" with "Qumranite"), and makes them fundamentally different, is how that collection of interpretations comes about. The Essenes at Qumran fundamentally repudiated the authority of any Pharisee/Rabbi as "men" (you will find a similar repudiation of the authority of men in the New Testgament), to be able to make additional rulings about Torah law not directly found in the Hebrew bible. They believed - like the Sadducees did - that such rulings must be found directly in the text of scripture itself. In this respect, the Pharisees stood completely alone in Second Temple times. No other "party" of Judaism agreed with them that mere mortals had the authority to make up laws which would have the same status and authority as God's law. It is why the Pharisees are given such a hard time by Jesus in the Gospels. Of all the Jews at that time, Jesus found what the Pharisees were doing as being particularly reprehensible and sinful

As a last note, I would say: if you are still intent on studying Mishnah and Talmud, do it strictly for the sake of understanding today's Haredi (Hasidic) Judaism (the last remaining heirs of the Rabbis) in its own right. Rabbinic Judaism has dominated the history of the Jews from the time of the destruction of the Temple and can't be simply ignored. And for that reason alone, they deserve serious consideration. But what ever you do, don't do what scholars of Judaism did of yesteryear, and simply equate what you find in the Mishnah and Talmud, and retroject those traditions, laws, and teaching, back in time and try to make out everyone in the Second Temple period were observing them in that exact same manner. We now know that a good 80% of the stuff found in the Mishnah and Talmud were simply unknown, or completely ignored in the Second Temple. This is why you can't read the old scholarly texts of yesteryear; works like Jeramias' "Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus", or Schürer's "A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ". Those guys got it fundamentally wrong, and to read them as if they were still authoritative is to allow yourself to be grossly mislead on matters of basic history. You need bang up to date histories of Second Temple Judaism. You need to get one from one of those scholars who refuse to allow Jewish "lore", "tradition", and "belief" to rule our practice of history. Sander's "Judaism: Practice and Belief 63 BCE - 66 CE" is the very best, and I highly recommend it. Get that at all costs. 

Not to derail the topic, but I think this has been a good illustration of why we could benefit from a Jewish base package, without needing to pick and choose from specific collections or resources. There's no single collection that really pulls everything useful together.

For what it's worth, I wouldn't return the Jewish Studies Library Expansion. It has many still-useful books, at a great sale price. Other resources you read will also link to the Talmud, and it's useful to read those perspectives, even if they weren't necessarily practiced or codified until later.

There's an expression, "Two Jews, three opinions," but this is not unique to Judaism. No one holds to the exact same views, whether in an ancient or a modern synagogue or church.

There's so much division today, not only in the world but also in churches and families. The greatest comfort for me is that eternity will unite us, in how we will be able to see and know our Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace, better than we know Him now.

Mike Tourangeau said:

Do you think either of the previous two would be different than the last?

I recommended the two earlier books. I'm not familiar with the Docherty volume (although I have it in my library). The books seem all to have a similar aim, with the distinctives noted below.

• Docherty's volume focuses only on the pseudepigrapha. That means works such as 1 & 2 Maccabees, Tobit and Jubilees are not discussed. It also focusses on literature, so history is barely discussed. I therefore wouldn't recommend it to people not familiar with intertestamental history and in particular the Maccabean revolt (unless you were going to look at that elsewhere). It's fairly short (67,000 words).
• Helyer's volume combines both history and literature, and is much broader, covering the Maccabean period, the DSS, Philo, Josephus and the Misnah. It's a pretty substantial book, at 236,000 words.
• Nickelsburg's volume is similar to Heyler's in that it combines history and literature, but covers a smaller corpus. There's no mention of Philo or Josephus, nor much of the DSS (certainly not of their sectarian literature). I don't have it in Logos so can't do a word count, but in size it's somewhere between the other two volumes.

My recommendation would be Helyer if you don't mind the length, purely because its the most comprehensive, and it combines literature and history which I think is important (you need both unless you're already familiar with one). Nickelsburg is a shorter alternative if you don't mind the narrower focus and aren't so interested in the DSS.