Was Jesus a "rabbi"?

[Daniel]

I hear this claim all the time--that Jesus was a rabbi--and I never know what to think. I'm aware that He was a teacher who had disciples under Him, and I'm also aware that there are some scriptural verses where the disciples do call Him "rabbi". But I was under the impression that this is just the untranslated Hebrew/Aramaic word for "master" (perhaps used as an honorific title), not the same thing that we mean when we say "rabbi". Further, I thought "rabbis" (in our sense of the word) were a Talmudic/post-Temple novelty, not a part of pre-Christian Judaism.

Does anyone know? Did rabbis exist in Jesus's day, and was Jesus one of them?


edit - Sorry admin, I may have posted this in the wrong forum. Feel free to move it somewhere else.

[aquinas138]

Rabbis, as we know them now, are basically Pharisees. Over the course of the first century AD, beginning with the coming of Christ and culminating in the destruction of the Temple, the Old Testament religion produced two "successor religions," Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism. Christianity is the OT religion superseded, transformed, fulfilled, completed, or whatever term you prefer, with Christ our God as Priest and Victim; Rabbinic Judaism is the response of the Pharisees to the destruction of the Temple, and the Talmud and other works and practices are their effort to live the OT religion as best they can without the Temple.

There are scholars who maintain that Jesus was a Pharisee; the biblical representation of that school is somewhat simplified, as there were competing versions of Pharisaism in Our Lord's time. Thus they maintain the conflict between Christ and the Pharisees was really an in-party fight, not between two radically different parties. I'm not sure I accept that, but I'm no specialist in 1st century Judaism.

[clau clau]

Over the course of the first century AD, beginning with the coming of Christ and culminating in the destruction of the Temple, the Old Testament religion produced two "successor religions," Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism.

I do not agree that there were 2 successor religions.  Only one; Rabbinic Judaism.  Christianity was just the continuation of the Old Covenant.

From the Canon of the Mass

P: Be pleased to look upon these offerings with a serene and kindly countenance, and to accept them, as once you were pleased to accept the gifts of your servant Abel the just, the sacrifice of Abraham, our father in faith, and the offering of your high priest Melchizedek, a holy sacrifice, a spotless victim.

[aquinas138]

Over the course of the first century AD, beginning with the coming of Christ and culminating in the destruction of the Temple, the Old Testament religion produced two "successor religions," Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism.

I do not agree that there were 2 successor religions.  Only one; Rabbinic Judaism.  Christianity was just the continuation of the Old Covenant.

From the Canon of the Mass

P: Be pleased to look upon these offerings with a serene and kindly countenance, and to accept them, as once you were pleased to accept the gifts of your servant Abel the just, the sacrifice of Abraham, our father in faith, and the offering of your high priest Melchizedek, a holy sacrifice, a spotless victim.

In the true spiritual sense, yes, Christianity is the only real continuation. I think the term "continuation" is potentially misleading, though, as the coming of Christ changed a whole lot about the practical details of religion - dietary observances, appointed prayers and festivals, etc.; to an outside observer, Christianity might not much resemble the religion as lived by Israelites even during Christ's life, especially as the number of Gentile Christians came to predominate, whereas among the Jews of the Christian era, everything but the Temple liturgy stayed much the same - synagogue services, the daily ritual life, the names you gave your children, etc. In a sociological sense, there are definitely two successor religions, both of which claim continuity with the Old Testament religion.