Rabbi Maregaal, what do you think of this (the reestablishment of the Sanhedrin)?
MY RESPONSE: 12/4/2011
The problem with the "Sanhedrin" is that it does not promote the pure Torah. It promotes "Rabbinical" Judaism, which is NOT absolute pure/real Judaism.
Furthermore, the “biblical” government is "only" supposed to be a theocratic monarchy, where the king is the supreme ruler and shares no power. While the king can set up judges, those judges are only to interpret laws, not to give laws, just like the American court system is “supposed” to do.
Rabbinical Judaism says this...
"Moshe received the Torah at Sinai and transmitted it to Joshua; Joshua to the Elders; the Elders to the Prophets; and the Prophets transmitted it to the Members of the Great Assembly (Avot 1:1)."
However, the truth of the matter is that Moses, the prophet, was a Levite and he gave the law to Aaron his Levitical brother and to his sons. The "priests" were to teach the law and they did teach the law. Even Ezra was a priest and he taught the law to the people. He was not the High Priest, however. For the second Temple was already existing for some time and he was still dwelling in Persia, its hard to be a High Priest in the Temple when you are in Persia. Nonetheless, according to the Torah, every seven years the priests were to read the law publicly during the feast of Tabernacles.
When reading "rabbinical" literature about Jewish history, you will always get a slant from their point of view and from their biasness, they are offshoots of the Pharisees. They will always favor themselves in order to legitimize themselves and their beliefs. However, the Sadducees were the priests, not the Pharisees.
The Sadducees and the Pharisees were always at odds with each other, once the sect of the Pharisees came into existence.
The Sadducees were the priests and they only maintained that the written Torah was the only Torah. Which is true.
Granted, there must be some “additional” laws that the Torah does not bring up, or is vague on. However, those additional laws must never contradict, nor undermine the law of Moses. Much of the “oral” law of rabbinical Judaism does just that, it contradicts the Torah. When “oral” law contradicts the law of Moses then those particular “oral” laws are automatically invalid.
It is hard to determine when the sect of Pharisees actually started, as well as the “Sanhedrin.” The first mention of the gerousía of Jerusalem is connected with the reign of Antiochus the Great (223-187 B.CE..; Joseph. "Antiq.", XII, iii, 3). From that time on, we are able to follow the history of the Sanhedrin until its disappearance in the overthrow of the Jewish nation.
“Gerousía” is a Greek word that means “the assembly of the ancients,” it was the common name of the Sanhedrin.
When the Maccabees were Kings and High Priests, they were the supreme rulers.
When Herod came around, Herod put to death the last Hasmonean king and then he murdered the people of the Sanhedrin that accused him of crimes. After Herod died and after the death of the last King/Priest, the Sanhedrin was a mixed bunch.
The Sanhedrin is a threat to biblical law and to all those that want to live the biblical lifestyle. This is because they will have the power to enforce their own customs and laws which oppose bible law in many ways.
I hope this helps.
Thank you for the question.