aa5874

Again, your "reason" could NOT be the ONLY reason. You very well know that the Jewish version of Miriam and Yosef Panders may have not been yet composed.

Please, present a dated recovered Jewish source for the Miriam and Yosef Pandera story before the 2nd century.

Duvduv

There was no early Toldoth, but there was a Jewish tradition about Yeshu Pandera. I have already pointed out that had the later Talmud simply wanted to libel the Christian tale it would have done so much more directly, as it criticizes other groups or ideas. The ONLY common feature of Pandera and NT Jesus is that the parents were Miriam and Joseph and that he was killed on the eve of Passover. Otherwise nothing is the same in the stories. Yeshu is a magician, not a false messiah figure. He has five disciples whose names do not resemble those of the NT. There is no Paul.
That's it as the Jewish tradition. And of course the contrast is never even brought up as I described.

aa5874

Again I have exposed your blatant error.

Examine your previous claim.

Your statement is highly illogical. There are more than one reason. One reason could be that the Jewish source was LATE and AFTER the Jesus story was already known.

Jewish writings are known to contain events that never did ever happen.

Duvduv

AA, I have already addressed that issue, and if you want to speculate, at least provide some solid rationale for such speculation. You cannot state empirically that *Jewish* writings are "known to contain events that never did happen." All you can do is make that assertion. Remember, AA, we are not examining the field of biology or chemistry.

I have already addressed the issue of Miriam and Pandera as well, but I guess you didn't follow it or show interest in it.

aa5874

I have already exposed your errors.

Duvduv

So IF there was a Jewish tradition of a Yeshu son of Miriam and Joseph, WHY would the Gospel writers use those same names KNOWING that this would just impugne the religion of Yesoos? And WHO would have done it?

Along the lines of Mountainman's thoughts, does this fact raise questions about the ORIGINAL intentions of the gospel writers if they were writing on behalf of their imperial masters? Were they slipping in a mockery of the Yesoos religion without their sponsors realizing they were casting aspersions on the imperial religion?

Of course I am aware that the notion of the earlier Jewish Yeshu story is an *anathema* to academic correctness following in the footsteps of church correctness since everybody knows that Jewish history as recorded in ancient traditional Jewish texts is utterly beyond the realm of reality.
However, I pose the question anyway, as taboo as it may be.

aa5874

The reconstruction of the past must be based on Credible sources--not on known sources of fiction and perjury.

The Pauline writings cannot be relied on for historical accuracy.

Now, in writings attributed to Eusebius it is claimed that Tatian a supposed disciple of Justin Martyr had what is called a "Diatessaron"--an almagamation of the Four Gospels.

But strange enough Eusebius claimed he did NOT know how Tatian managed to compile it. Based on Eusebius' Tatian's "Diatessaron" was still in existence when he wrote "Church History.

Eusebius' "Church History" 4.29 But, when we EXAMINE the writings of Justin, Tatian's Teacher, we find that the MEMOIRS of the Apostles called Gospels appear to contain Elements of the Four Gospels.

There are certain passages that are FOUND ONLY in gMark, gMatthew, gLuke and gJohn in the MEMOIRS of the Apostles.

1. Elements of the "Diatessaron" in gMark and Justin, Tatian's Teacher.

1.Justin's Dialogue With Trypho CVIMark 3:17 KJV 2. Elements of the "Diatessaron" in gMatthew and Justin, Tatian's Teacher.

2. Justin's "Dialogue With Trypho LXXVIII Matthew 2:11 KJV 3. Elements of the "Diatessaron" in gLuke and Justin, Tatian's Teacher.

Justin's "Dialogue With Trypho" LXXVIII Luke 2:2-5 KJV 4. Elements of the "Diatessaron" in gJohn and Justin.

Justin's "First Apology XXXII John 1:14 KJV It is clear that Justin Martyr's writings suggest that the Memoirs of the Apostles was a type of "Diatessaron" since he never at any time acknowledged the Four Gospels but yet was aware of passages that were most likely found in the "Diatessaron".

However, it must be noted that although Justin mentioned the Logos as the Son of God he did NOT claim that the Logos was God and Equal to God.

Justin's LOGOS was the Next, or Second, after God.

Justin's First Apology XXXII Justin's Dialogue With Trypho XIIL The writings of Justin PREDATE the teaching that Jesus was EQUAL to God and was God as found in gJohn 1 and the Pauline letters--Philippians 2.

The Jesus story and cult originated in the 2nd century as the recovered DATED manuscripts and compatible sources suggest.

mountainman

I am assuming you are referring to the so-called Jewish tradition found in the Sefer Toledot Yeshu or Toledoth Jeschu - The Book of the History of Jesus, or Generations of Jesus, or Life of Jesus) This is described as an "anti-gospel" or parody of the Christian gospel, and the evidence suggests it was written AFTER the canonical gospels were published. Epiphanius appears to have knowledge of its contents towards the end of the 4th century.



IMHO the author of the Toledot Yeshu wrote after the authors of the canonical gospels had done their inventive writing, not the other way around.


I have reason to think that the original authorship of the Toledot Yeshu was in the Greek language, just like the books of the canon, and just like the rest of the books of the non canonical texts.

Duvduv

Yes, I know that Toldoth was later, although the essence of the story itself is recorded in the Talmud in several places, especially Tractate Sanhedrin 43a, 67a and 107b. The Soncino version online in English has footnotes, but here is the text. See also http://gnosis.org/library/grs-mead/j..._100/ch10.html

MISHNAH. IF THEN THEY FIND HIM INNOCENT, THEY DISCHARGE HIM; BUT IF NOT, HE GOES FORTH TO BE STONED, AND A HERALD PRECEDES HIM [CRYING]: SO AND SO, THE SON OF SO AND SO, IS GOING FORTH TO BE STONED BECAUSE HE COMMITTED SUCH AND SUCH AN OFFENCE, AND SO AND SO ARE HIS WITNESSES. WHOEVER KNOWS ANYTHING IN HIS FAVOUR, LET HIM COME AND STATE IT.

Abaye said; It must also be announced: On such and such a day, at such and such and hour, and in such and such a place [the crime was committed], in case there are some who know [to the contrary], so that they can come forward and prove the witnesses Zomemim.

AND A HERALD PRECEDES HIM etc. This implies, only immediately before [the execution], but not previous thereto.33 [In contradiction to this] it was taught: On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.' But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover! — Ulla retorted: 'Do you suppose that he was one for whom a defense could be made? Was he not a Mesith [enticer], concerning whom Scripture says, Neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him?36 With Yeshu however it was different, for he was connected with the government [or royalty, i.e., influential].'

Our Rabbis taught: Yeshu had five disciples, Matthai, Nakai, Nezer, Buni and Todah. When Matthai was brought [before the court] he said to them [the judges], Shall Matthai be executed? Is it not written, Matthai [when] shall I come and appear before God? Thereupon they retorted; Yes, Matthai shall be executed, since it is written, When Matthai [when] shall [he] die and his name perish. When Nakai was brought in he said to them; Shall Nakai be executed? It is not written, Naki [the innocent] and the righteous slay thou not? Yes, was the answer, Nakai shall be executed, since it is written, in secret places does Naki [the innocent] slay. When Nezer was brought in, he said; Shall Nezer be executed? Is it not written, And Nezer [a twig] shall grow forth out of his roots. Yes, they said, Nezer shall be executed, since it is written, But thou art cast forth away from thy grave like Nezer [an abhorred offshoot].When Buni was brought in, he said: Shall Buni be executed? Is it not written, Beni [my son], my first born? Yes, they said, Buni shall be executed, since it is written, Behold I will slay Bine-ka [thy son] thy first born. And when Todah was brought in, he said to them; Shall Todah be executed? Is it not written, A psalm for Todah [thanksgiving]?Yes, they answered, Todah shall be executed, since it is written, Whoso offereth the sacrifice of Todah [thanksgiving] honoured me.

— When King Jannai slew our Rabbis, R. Joshua b. Perahjah (and Jesus) fled to Alexandria of Egypt. On the resumption of peace, Simeon b. Shetach sent to him: 'From me, (Jerusalem) the holy city, to thee, Alexandria of Egypt (my sister). My husband dwelleth within thee and I am desolate.' He arose, went, and found himself in a certain inn, where great honour was shewn him. 'How beautiful is this Acsania!' (The word denotes both inn and innkeeper. R. Joshua used it in the first sense; the answer assumes the second to be meant.) Thereupon (Jesus) observed, 'Rabbi, her eyes are narrow.' 'Wretch,' he rebuked him, 'dost thou thus engage thyself.' He sounded four hundred trumpets and excommunicated him. He (Jesus) came before him many times pleading, 'Receive me!' But he would pay no heed to him. One day he (R. Joshua) was reciting the Shema', when Jesus came before him. He intended to receive him and made a sign to him. He (Jesus) thinking that it was to repel him, went, put up a brick, and worshipped it. 'Repent,' said he (R. Joshua) to him. He replied, 'I have thus learned from thee: He who sins and causes others to sin is not afforded the means of repentance.' And a Master has said, 'Jesus the Nazarene practised magic and led Israel astray.'

http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_67.html
In the uncensored editions of the Talmud there follows this important passage (supplied from D.S. on the authority of the Munich and Oxford Mss. and the older editions) 'And this they did to Ben Stada in Lydda ([H]), and they hung him on the eve of Passover. Ben Stada was Ben Padira. R. Hisda said: 'The husband was Stada, the paramour Pandira. But was nor the husband Pappos b. Judah? — His mother's name was Stada. But his mother was Miriam, a dresser of woman's hair? ([H] megaddela neshayia): — As they say in Pumbaditha, This woman has turned away ([H]) from her husband, (i.e., committed adultery).'

Duvduv

The point I was making earlier was that had the Talmud simply been engaged in creating a parody, it would have done so with more direct and clear references. Yeshu in the Talmud is merely a deceptive magician with parents named Miriam and Pandera (NOT a messianic figure of any kind, and CERTAINLY not the savior YESOOS of the Rho-Chi 325 Nicene religion), and five disciples whose names do not resemble those of anyone in the gospels, and was executed on the eve of Passover. Thus the sum total of the similarities is limited to the parents and date of execution. Thus there is no reason to believe that a tradition about this Yeshu from the time of Jannaeus did not exist whenever the gospels were written.

The rabbis of the Talmud were never shy to condemn those who they felt had committed sins, including Jews. So IF they wanted merely to make allusions to the already established nativity stories, they would not have used the Yeshu, Miriam or Yosef for fear of retribution. Or if they WERE going to use Yeshu as a parody on Jesus, they would have certainly gone further to establish the similarities.

Therefore, the question arose as WHY the gospels writers would use the names of Mary and Joseph when it would cast aspersions on their gospel story.

Mountainman, if the Jewish tradition about Miriam and Yosef Pandera and Yeshu did precede the gospels, then the only logical explanation as to why the names of Mary and Joseph appear in the gospel story is because they (and possibly the whole gospels) were actually written by people who did not take the YESOOS religion seriously and who were mocking it with the details from the Yeshu story intentionally without the officialdom realizing it.