mountainman

In the history of BC&H commentary The Talmud has at times
been cited as offering certain obscure references
to the existence of Jesus, the Gospels and/or
Christianity. Since it is believed to have been
recompiled (following the fall of Jerusalem to the
Roman imperial will) c.200 CE, one might expect
perhaps there to be some references.

Why isn't there any references?


Or are there references in the Talmud which are
unambiguous references to Jesus, the Gospels
and/or Christianity? What has scholarship recorded?

I have not studied the Jewish literature in as much
depth as I would have liked, and would be indebted
for any shortcuts in this environment.

Speaking of which, is someone able to PM me with
RED DAVE's email address, or better yet ask him
to email arius at the domain mountainman.com.au

Best wishes,


Pete Brown
www.mountainman.com.au

mountainman

WIKI = "Yeshu"

Interpretations of the name
There is some debate over the meaning of "Yeshu." It has been used as an acronym (יש"ו) for the Hebrew expression ימח שמו וזכרו (yemach shemo vezichro), meaning "May his name and memory be obliterated", a term used for those guilty of enticing Jews to idolatry and used in place of the real names of individuals guilty of such sins who are deemed not worthy of being remembered in history. Some argue that this has always been its meaning. Indeed the name does not correspond to any known Hebrew root and moreover no other individuals have ever borne this name in Jewish history, while the usage of the expression yemach shemo vezichro and its acronym were widely used in Jewish writings.

Others point out that the word is similar to, and may be a wordplay on, Yeshua, believed by many to be the original Aramaic or Hebrew name of Jesus, the central figure of Christianity. Due to this fact, along with the occurrence in several manuscripts of the Babylonian Talmud of the appellation Ha-Notzri, which some Christian writers submit may refer to the nazarene, and some similarities between the stories of the two figures, some or many of the references to Yeshu have been traditionally understood to refer to the Jesus of Christianity.

The question has historically been a delicate one because Yeshu is portrayed in a negative light; negative portrayals of Jesus in Jewish literature have incited negative Christian reactions, even anti-semitism.

The references of Yeshu have been used as evidence for the Historicity of Jesus but also to discredit Christianity.

Currently, there are at least three approaches to the relationship of Yeshu and Jesus:

that there is no relationship between Yeshu and Jesus
that Yeshu refers to Jesus
that Yeshu is a literary device used by Rabbis to comment on their relationship to and with early Christians.

No Robots

There are several unambiguous references to Christ in the Talmud. One example:

Our Rabbis taught: When R. Eliezer was arrested because of Minuth they brought him up to the tribune to be judged. Said the governor to him, 'How can a sage man like you occupy himself with those idle things?' He replied, 'I acknowledge the Judge as right.' The governor thought that he referred to him — though he really referred to his Father in Heaven — and said, 'Because thou hast acknowledged me as right, I pardon; thou art acquitted.' When he came home, his disciples called on him to console him, but he would accept no consolation. Said R. Akiba to him, 'Master, wilt thou permit me to say one thing of what thou hast taught me?' He replied, 'Say it.' 'Master,' said he, 'perhaps some of the teaching of the Minim had been transmitted to thee and thou didst approve of it and because of that thou wast arrested?' He exclaimed: 'Akiba thou hast reminded me.' I was once walking in the upper-market of Sepphoris when I came across one of the disciples of Jesus the Nazarene Jacob of Kefar-Sekaniah by name, who said to me: It is written in your Torah, Thou shalt not bring the hire of a harlot … into the house of the Lord thy God. May such money be applied to the erection of a retiring place for the High Priest? To which I made no reply. Said he to me: Thus was I taught by Jesus the Nazarene, For of the hire of a harlot hath she gathered them and unto the hire of a harlot shall they return. They came from a place of filth, let them go to a place of filth. Those words pleased me very much, and that is why I was arrested for apostacy; for thereby I transgressed the scriptural words, Remove thy way far from her — which refers to minuth — and come not nigh to the door of her house, — which refers to the ruling power.—Abodah Zarah, folio 16b-17a

mountainman

Your source is very late No Robots (end of the 4th century)
Therefore the question ...

Does a first century reference have any appreciable
difference to a 2nd, 3rd or fourth century reference
in your opinion, and what difference does it actually
make to your own position?


According to this source:

Tradition ascribes the compilation of the Babylonian Talmud in its present form to two Babylonian sages, Rav Ashi and Ravina. Ashi was president of the Sura Academy from 375 to 427 CE. The work begun by Ashi was completed by Ravina, who is traditionally regarded as the final Amoraic expounder. Accordingly, traditionalists argue that Ravina’s death in 499 CE is the latest possible date for the completion of the redaction of the Talmud. However, even on the most traditional view a few passages are regarded as the work of a group of rabbis who edited the Talmud after the end of the Amoraic period, known as the Saboraim or Rabbanan Savora'e (meaning "reasoners" or "considerers").

The Babylonian Talmud (if this is what you are citing) was
first prepared after christianity existed in the fourth century.

The earliest component of the Jewish Talmud is the Mishnah
which is dated to c.200 CE. There is no generally accepted
references in the Mishnah to either Jesus or christianity
before a certain century. But which century?



Best wishes,



Pete Brown

mountainman

A reminder for me to dig out the list of sources cited
as soon as time permits. I have seen them listed
around the net on my travels.




I think that you'll find that these references
have associated with them a certain degree
of ambiguity. That is, there are many
commentators who dispute that these
references are sound.

Let's dig them out and have a look at them?
I'm game. My bet is that we will be left
with a list of "urban myths".


Best wishes,



Pete

mountainman

The main citation offered appears to be this one:

Clearly, there are some problems with historical
consistency: names, addresses, phone numbers.

A summary article entitled The Jesus Narrative In The Talmud
lists four references and another series
related to Ben Stada (aka Ben Pandira)
whom some commentators presciently
identify as "Jesus in disguise".


Notably, the article concludes with:


Over to you No Robots, or whoever wishes to
argue that there is a consensus that Jesus
or the Gospels or indeed Christianity is
mentioned at all in the Talmud.


As far as I am concerned we are looking
into a "great silence" for a great reason.



Pete

Apikorus

See "Jesus in the Talmud (or via: amazon.co.uk)," by Peter Schaefer, published just this year.

No Robots

Pete:

The article you linked to does not mention the passage that I cited.

From the Forward to the Soncino edition of the Babylonian Talmud:

A voluminous work like the Babylonian Gemara, passing through the hands of numberless copyists, could not have remained free from errors. Fifty years ago, Rabbinowicz collected variants to the current Text, and examined it in the light of manuscripts, especially of the Munich MS. which covers the whole Talmud and dates from the year 1334. Alas, that that is the only complete MS. of the Talmud in existence, due to the bigotry of the medieval popes, who often consigned whole cartloads of Talmud MSS. to the flames. After the invention of printing, stupid and over-zealous censors not only expunged the few passages that refer to the Founder of Christianity, but also many others which they in their ignorance looked upon as disguised attacks upon their religion. Only one edition of the Talmud has escaped defacement at the hands of the censors, having been printed in Holland.

Some commentary by Constantin Brunner.

andrewcriddle

One can find many of the alleged parallels at http://www.saltshakers.com/lm/Herford.rtf

(Note this page contains several parallels that I think unlikely as well as those that I regard as genuine references to Jesus and Christianity.)

Andrew Criddle

mountainman

Thanks.

One reviewer at Amazon writes:

So we see immediately that certain scholars
are arguing against the claim - Johann Maier.

And we have yet to examine the transmission
of the texts, as to when they were written, and
what the oldest documents are extant, etc, etc.



So Peter Schaefer is claiming Jesus was the Roman soldier
Panthera. This has been done before by others, and at
the same time, this has been refuted by others on a number
of grounds.

Nothing unambiguous here.