The oral Torah. Authority of God or man?

Skepticism should not be thought of as a dirty word. Even for believers. There is nothing wrong for us believers to question things that Judaism sees as sacred, such as the Talmud. Quite often the Apostolic Writing is bashed by traditional Judaism, for the reason that it claims to be as authoritative as the Written Torah. But at the same time the Rabbis own a vast amount of documents that were written many years after the Torah itself was written, which they claim as holding a greater authority than the Torah. According to traditional Orthodox Judaism, Moses, at Sinai, received two sets of Laws, rules and regulations. The "written Torah" which includes the five books of Moses, and the "Oral Torah" that they claim, was given in order to be transmitted to the leaders of Israel. This "Oral Torah" is a series of arguments, opinions and commentaries that enable each generation to interpret the Torah according to the needs of that time. In this way, the Rabbis say, the Written Torah remains inflexible, and irrelevant. The need for such an accompanied document is usually explained in this way: "God told us not to work on the Shabbat day. But what constitutes work? God surely would not tell us to do something without explaining how to do it in the right way, right? Therefore the "Oral Torah" is absolutely necessary." Because of this claim, the Rabbis own an incredible vast amount of volumes that explain every outlook of the everyday life of a Jew. This, astonishingly, makes the Rabbis not only emissaries of the new laws, but the makers of these laws. Orthodox Jews will say that this transfer of authority is part of God's plan, like it is really a fact that God gave His authority to this process. Some, explain it in this way: "actually, God limit Himself from intervening directly in the halachic process. He prefers an orderly process instead of miracles and voices from Heaven. When supernatural events are allowed to sway halachic decisions, all the structure of Torah study-the pillar on which all Judaism leans- will collapse. The moment the ability of the Sages to interpret Torah is stripped, the arguments and conversation of the Talmud become meaningless. If Judaism is supposed to be a dynamic way of life, which refereshes itself time and again, it is the right of the Sages to decide on a halacha that have to be independent from godly authority of cancellation." ( Natan T. Lopez Cardoso The torah, written and Oral P. 76. So, the question arises, how do we become the people who decide at what level God is involved or not, in the decision making? The Mishnah was the first time that the Oral Torah appeared in writing. It includes data that was available 100 to 200 years beforehand. But, is there any proofe that these "laws" originated at Mount Sinai? This is an important question. If at Mount Sinai there was no authority given to interpret the Torah and set up halachot, then it means that the Rabbis never had any Godly authority to do so. By the same token, Non-Orthodox Jews need to understand that the traditions of their belief are man-made. A tradition that denies Yeshua as Messiah. Many are pointing to certain writings of the Sages that speak of Yeshua cannot be who He is. But aren't these writings a response of Rabbis who lived in the time of Yeshua, who decided that Yeshua is a threat to their authority? Leaders who cared only for their political standing? How accurately was the Oral Torah transmitted from generation to generation? Between Moses and the writing of the Mishanah there were 1000 years in which the Jewish people went through many storms and changes, that included, Living in the Land, exile and assimilation. These events, often, caused the people to forget the Torah Laws. If the Written Torah was neglected so easily, how much more is the case of Oral Torah? Is it really possible for the Oral Torah to be remembered in exactly the same way from Sinai to the Mishnah? The Rabbis state many different reasons to the importance of keeping the character of the OT (Oral Torah), as oral compared to the written Torah. One of the reasons is that keeping the rules oral protects the OT from falling into the wrong hands. If this reason is so important, then why write the OT in the first place? The Rabbis answer is, that if the laws of the OT would not have been written, Judaism would have not survive. They point to the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. But didn't the OT survived the destruction of the 1st Temple? Would not God continue to protect her, if her validity is the case? Is there any hint in the Written Torah for the existence of an Oral Torah? The Rabbis will point to Deut. 17:8-13 and say, that the Rabbis have sole authority to interpret the Torah and tell us how to live our lives. Anyone who refuses to listen to them is guilty of sin in the eyes of God. This is a complete fabrication of the text. These verses do not mention any Rabbis. They only relate to the role of Judges who set at the city gates and decide on difficult cases. The passage does not give the Rabbis, who came later in history, the authority to say to the Jewish people how to handle every detail in their private, or corporate lives. In fact, there is no mention in Scriptures that gives humans this kind of authority, an authority that exceeds the words of the Torah and the Prophets, who spoke through the inspiration of God. The Talmud says that anyone who reject the notion that Moses gave us the written and Oral Torahs, does not have a share in the world to come. There is no hint to that in the Scriptures. Bottom line is, whereas the Tanach does not say anything of Oral Torah, it speaks of a New Covenant to come Jerem. 31:31-33. It is not that the Talmud is devoid of value, but when Rabbis read what Rabbis before them wrote instead of reading the Scriptures themselves in order to seal their authority, authority which denies Yeshua, the Oral Torah has to be questioned.