Yeshu in the Talmud

[technomage]

OK, according to Wikipedia, there are a number of references to Yeshu in the Talmudic literature--specifically, in the Tosefta (a compilation of Oral Law, similar to the Mishnah and usually seen as less authoritative), and the Babylonian Talmud (the Jerusalem Talmud makes no mention of Yeshu). Let's go through them.

Tosefta

In Chullin 2:22-24 a man named Jacob from the town of Sichnin is mentioned who performed healing in the name of a certain Yeshu. Jacob is associated with minuth, a Talmudic term (sometimes translated heresy or apostasy) used for one who followed a mixture of Judaism and paganism of the kind that existed in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. The event occurs in the second century CE at the time of Rabbi Akiva. Jacob says that he was taught by Yeshu.

Babylonian Talmud

In Avodah Zarah 16b,17a, the anecdote about Jacob from the town of Sichnin (Sechania in Aramaic) from the Tosefta is mentioned and he is described as a follower of Yeshu.

Here we see a Jacob of Sichnin, student of Yeshu ... yet Jacob is a contemporary with Rabbi Akiva, a noted 2nd c. CE Rabbi. Unless we take "Jacob, a student of Yeshu" as meaning a later Christian disciple (rather than a direct student), the chronology makes it impossible that this reference to Yeshu could be Jesus.

In Gittin 56b, 57a a story is mentioned in which Onkelos summons up the spirit of a Yeshu who sought to harm Israel. He describes his punishment in the afterlife as boiling in excrement.

No idea. Onkelos is a semi-legendary Talmudic figure--supposedly the nepher of Titus, the Roman general who sacked Jerusalem, then went on to be emperor.

In Sanhedrin 43a, the execution of a certain Yeshu for sorcery, and enticing others to apostasy, is mentioned. Because of his connections with the government a town crier was sent to call for witnesses in his favour for forty days before his execution. No one came forth and in the end he was stoned and hanged on the Eve of Passover. Sanhedrin 43a also mentions that a certain Yeshu (possibly intended to be the one it mentions earlier) had gathered five disciples Matai, Nekai, Netzer, Buni, and Todah who were executed. In the Florence manuscript of the Talmud (1177 CE) an addition is made to Sanhedrin 43a saying that Yeshu was hanged on the eve of the Sabbath. This is not found in the other manuscripts and is generally considered too late to have authority.

The Sanhedrin lost the authority to pronounce its own death sentences when Judea was demoted from a client kingdom to a province. Therefore, unless this story is legendary, it occurred before 6 CE, and therefore could not refer to Jesus.

Sanhedrin 103a and Berachot 17b, talk about a Yeshu who burns his food in public, possibly a reference to pagan sacrifices.

Insufficient information.

In Sanhedrin 107b and Sotah 47a a Yeshu is mentioned as a student of Joshua Ben Perachiah who was sent away for judging a woman by her physical appearance. (This happened during their period of refuge in Egypt during the persecutions of Pharisees 88-76 BCE ordered by Jannaeus Alexander. The incident is also mentioned in the Jerusalem Talmud in Chagigah 2:2 but there the person in question is not given any name.) After several returns for forgiveness he mistook Perachiah's signal to wait a moment as a signal of final rejection, and so he turned to idolatry (described by the euphemism "worshipping a brick"). A quote from the Mishnaic era is given in which it is explained that Yeshu practised black magic, deceived and led Israel astray. This quote is seen by some as an explanation in general for the designation Yeshu. In the Munich manuscript of the Talmud (1342 CE), the appelation Ha-Notzri is added to this last mention of Yeshu.

Again, the date makes it impossible for this to refer to Jesus.

Now, there are also attempts to conflate various names--such as "ben-Pandera" or "ben-Stada", from other passages of the Talmudic literature. If we need to, we can go over that as well in this thread. But as things stand now, folks, my research has been awfiully sparse on this topic, but frankly I don't see any reason to associate any of these references with Jesus. I'm hoping that interested parties will provide their points of view.

Justin

[wfaber]

The Sanhedrin lost the authority to pronounce its own death sentences when Judea was demoted from a client kingdom to a province. Therefore, unless this story is legendary, it occurred before 6 CE, and therefore could not refer to Jesus.

Generally, this is true.

There are two exceptions to make note of. The crucifixion of Jesus is one. The Sanhedrin had to threaten Pontius Pilate's reputation as a "Friend of Caesar" to get him to permit them to execute Jesus.

The other is the stoning of Stephen, probably around AD 36-37. But look at the historical context. In AD 36. the emperor Tiberius finally removed Pilate and replaced him with Marcellus. It probably wasn't more than a few months later that Tiberius died, and was replaced by Caligula, who in turn replaced Marcellus with Marullus as governor of Judea. And I'm sure these governors didn't immediately journey to Judea when appointed. During that time of political uncertainty, the Sanhedrin no doubt had the opportunity to sneak in a few executions of their own.

[kofh2u]

John 16:2 They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time
cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.

[technomage]

With all due respect, David, this has nothing to do with our discussion of the references to Yeshu in the Talmud. I certainly invite your input on this issue, but I must request that you remain on topic.

Thank you,

Justin

[NormATive]

OK, according to Wikipedia, there are a number of references to Yeshu in the Talmudic literature--specifically, in the Tosefta (a compilation of Oral Law, similar to the Mishnah and usually seen as less authoritative), and the Babylonian Talmud (the Jerusalem Talmud makes no mention of Yeshu). Let's go through them.



Here we see a Jacob of Sichnin, student of Yeshu ... yet Jacob is a contemporary with Rabbi Akiva, a noted 2nd c. CE Rabbi. Unless we take "Jacob, a student of Yeshu" as meaning a later Christian disciple (rather than a direct student), the chronology makes it impossible that this reference to Yeshu could be Jesus.



No idea. Onkelos is a semi-legendary Talmudic figure--supposedly the nepher of Titus, the Roman general who sacked Jerusalem, then went on to be emperor.





The Sanhedrin lost the authority to pronounce its own death sentences when Judea was demoted from a client kingdom to a province. Therefore, unless this story is legendary, it occurred before 6 CE, and therefore could not refer to Jesus.





Insufficient information.




Again, the date makes it impossible for this to refer to Jesus.

Now, there are also attempts to conflate various names--such as "ben-Pandera" or "ben-Stada", from other passages of the Talmudic literature. If we need to, we can go over that as well in this thread. But as things stand now, folks, my research has been awfiully sparse on this topic, but frankly I don't see any reason to associate any of these references with Jesus. I'm hoping that interested parties will provide their points of view.

Justin

Hi Justin.

I know there are a lot of xian websites out there claiming there are numerous spurious mentions of Yeshu (Joshua) in the Talmud, but I think they are mostly bogus.

I've been studying Judaism and reading Talmud and there is scant little mention of Jesus. When referring to his theology, it is common to refer to him as "a disciple of Hillel" because his teaching (at least that taught in the New Testament) is quite similar. For those unfamiliar with Hillel, he was a rabbinical teacher (Pharisee) who lived about 100 years prior to Jesus of Nazareth.

Also, Yeshu was such a common name at the time (Joshua being a favourite prophet in Jewish history), it would be difficult to discern exactly who was meant simply by the context.

The Talmud is mostly concerned with interpreting The Oral Law.

NORM

[kofh2u]

With all due respect, David, this has nothing to do with our discussion of the references to Yeshu in the Talmud. I certainly invite your input on this issue, but I must request that you remain on topic.

Thank you,

Justin

I was intentional brief because I suspect most people would have your opinion: "...this has nothing to do with our discussion"...

But, yet it has everything to do with how our mind is set before we critically examine the ancient texts. Certainly, the long debates on this new thread and the previous one, Jesus in the Talmud, bear me out.

There is NT confirmation that Jews thought they were correct in demonizing Christ and thennChristians. nThis text, Matthew, is a report of the attitude held by the majority of Jews, the ?establishment,: the main stream before Christians became so numerous.

Why would we not find Jewish writings supporting, encouraging, defending the murders of heretics?

Why should we do otherwise than lean towas interpretation of Talmud to say exactly this as might reasonably be expected? Legitinate historical criticism would tend to look for exactly the kinds of things that can be understood to support anti-Gentilistic Christianity.
Arguments that try to misinterpret Talmud, twisting such statements to say Talmud was not Anti-Jesus, anti-Christian is not only poor literary criticism, it defies the testamony of those persecuted and their witness in the New Testament. Does it not?

[NormATive]

...Arguments that try to misinterpret Talmud, twisting such statements to say Talmud was not Anti-Jesus, anti-Christian is not only poor literary criticism, it defies the testamony of those persecuted and their witness in the New Testament. Does it not?

No.

Talmud is NOT anti-christian. It is PRO-JUDAISM!

NORM

[kofh2u]

norm:
No.

Talmud is NOT anti-christian. It is PRO-JUDAISM!


KOFHY:
ABSOLUTELY!

It is all a matter of "My country, right or wrong!"

(Religious Nationalism)

[technomage]

Why would we not find Jewish writings supporting, encouraging, defending the murders of heretics?

There is a problem with that, David: the putatively "Jewish Writing" that supported murdering heretics is a forgery. Let's look at one version of the actual quoted text:

Book of Mishnah [sic] Torah
Yod Ha-Hazakah
by
our Master Moses son of Maimon
May the memory of the sainted be blessed
with Rabd's criticism and references

Translated in English
by
Rabbi Simon Glazer

Volume 1

Maimonides Publishing Co.
New York
5687 (1927)

. . .

Book One

. . .

The Treatise Concerning Worshipers of Stars and Their Practices [i.e. Treatise IV]

Chapter X.

1. It is forbidden to make a covenant of peace with the seven Canaanite nations, such peace as would permit them to continue the worship of idolatry, even as it is said: "Thous shalt not make any covenant with them" (Deut. 7.2). They shall either repent themselves of their worship, or be slain. It is moreover, forbidden to have mercy upon them, as it is said: "Nor show mercy unto them" (Ibid.). Therefore, if one saw one of them lost or drowning, he should not bring him up; if he sees him dying, he should not save him; but to destroy wantonly or to push him into a pit, or the like is forbidden, as long as he wages no war. That is saying concerning the Seven Canaanite nations; but as for informers and infidels of those times the war was to destroy them by one's own hand and to lower them to the nethermost pit of destruction because they persecuted Israel, and turned the people from following God.^1

2. Herefrom you are instructed that it is forbidden to give medical aid to an idolater even for hire. . .

note 1.
Ibid 26a. C.

Why should we do otherwise than lean towas interpretation of Talmud to say exactly this as might reasonably be expected? Legitinate historical criticism would tend to look for exactly the kinds of things that can be understood to support anti-Gentilistic Christianity.
Arguments that try to misinterpret Talmud, twisting such statements to say Talmud was not Anti-Jesus, anti-Christian is not only poor literary criticism, it defies the testamony of those persecuted and their witness in the New Testament. Does it not?

The problem with the arguments that say the Talmud was "Anti-Jesus, anti-Christian" is that from all the evidence I have seen, they are fundamentally dishonest. They cite quotes that are not present in the text (as Pythagoras did).

They also assert that certain passages are "code words" for anti-Jesus slurs (as Pythagoras did). Is such an accusation honest, or dishonest? That is what this thread is to discover, but if we come into our investigation already assuming that the Talmud is "Anti-Jesus, anti-Christian," then we have lost all objectivity.

David, I'm not asking you to take Pythagoras' word that the Talmud is anti-Christian. I'm not asking you to take my word that it is not anti-Christian. I am taking this opportunity to investigate the claims that Pythagoras has made, and I invite you to investigate with me. But if your mind is already made up, then you're probably wasting your time in reading the thread.

Justin

[Goose]

I'm not sure if anyone pointed this out, but YESH"U is an acronym and not the name Yeshua, which is Aramaic.

Good post Justin. I enjoy this site when it comes to such things about the Talmud:

http://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/

[kofh2u]

There is a problem with that, David: the putatively "Jewish Writing" that supported murdering heretics is a forgery. Let's look at one version of the actual quoted text:

Book of Mishnah [sic] Torah
Yod Ha-Hazakah
by
our Master Moses son of Maimon
May the memory of the sainted be blessed
with Rabd's criticism and references

Translated in English
by
Rabbi Simon Glazer

Volume 1

Maimonides Publishing Co.
New York
5687 (1927)

. . .

Book One

. . .

The Treatise Concerning Worshipers of Stars and Their Practices [i.e. Treatise IV]

Chapter X.

1. It is forbidden to make a covenant of peace with the seven Canaanite nations, such peace as would permit them to continue the worship of idolatry, even as it is said: "Thous shalt not make any covenant with them" (Deut. 7.2). They shall either repent themselves of their worship, or be slain. It is moreover, forbidden to have mercy upon them, as it is said: "Nor show mercy unto them" (Ibid.). Therefore, if one saw one of them lost or drowning, he should not bring him up; if he sees him dying, he should not save him; but to destroy wantonly or to push him into a pit, or the like is forbidden, as long as he wages no war. That is saying concerning the Seven Canaanite nations; but as for informers and infidels of those times the war was to destroy them by one's own hand and to lower them to the nethermost pit of destruction because they persecuted Israel, and turned the people from following God.^1

2. Herefrom you are instructed that it is forbidden to give medical aid to an idolater even for hire. . .

note 1.
Ibid 26a. C.

The problem with the arguments that say the Talmud was "Anti-Jesus, anti-Christian" is that from all the evidence I have seen, they are fundamentally dishonest. They cite quotes that are not present in the text (as Pythagoras did).

They also assert that certain passages are "code words" for anti-Jesus slurs (as Pythagoras did). Is such an accusation honest, or dishonest? That is what this thread is to discover, but if we come into our investigation already assuming that the Talmud is "Anti-Jesus, anti-Christian," then we have lost all objectivity.

David, I'm not asking you to take Pythagoras' word that the Talmud is anti-Christian. I'm not asking you to take my word that it is not anti-Christian. I am taking this opportunity to investigate the claims that Pythagoras has made, and I invite you to investigate with me. But if your mind is already made up, then you're probably wasting your time in reading the thread.

Justin

I understand.
And, I take no sides. You both seem to be performing true to the definition of Debate, back and forth, always springing back with another piece of evidence to refute the last challange. Excellent.

What I am saying is that although Pythag may be wrong, may be criticized for sources, may be defied in the verses he produces,... are you saying none exist which even you accept?

I am saying, is it your position that the Talmud does not encourage destruction ofChristians and Chrustianity among Jews, especially since it was written in the 2nd century while Christianity was at the mercy of pagan Rome AND the much larger Jewish community?

I am saying, is your argument here with Pythagorus concerned with form, (sources), or substance, (the truth of the matter under discussion)?

[Pythagoras]

An honest read of the Talmudic literature leaves no room for doubt that portions of it is indeed anti-Christian, just as portions of many Christian writings are anti-Semitic.

• Edited by a Moderator •

[technomage]

I'm not sure if anyone pointed this out, but YESH"U is an acronym and not the name Yeshua, which is Aramaic.

Shalom, Goose,

That is one opinion ... others say it is the name Yeshua (Jesus, or Joshua, or Yeshua, depending on how one translates it). The big problem is that the Talmud has both Hebrew and Aramaic sections in it: traditionally, the Mishna and Tanach references are in Hebrew, and the Gemara is in Aramaic. If the references to Yeshu are in the Gemara, then it's fairly obvious that they're talking about someone whose name could be translated into English as "Jesus."

However, it's not necessarily the Christian Jesus. Yeshua was a common name: it's the Aramaic version of Joshua, so for an Aramaic-speaking Jew to name their son "Yeshua" would be rather like a person from England naming their son "William (after the Conqueror), or someone from America naming their son George (after Washington).

Justin

[technomage]

Only a drug addict could suggest Talmud is never anti-Christian .

Pythagoras, drop the ad hominems or shut up and go away.

Justin

[technomage]

I am saying, is your argument here with Pythagorus concerned with form, (sources), or substance, (the truth of the matter under discussion)?

My interest is to discover the truth. However, at this point, thanks to Pythagoras' behavior, my desire to discover the truth on this particular issue is overcome by my disgust at his rhetoric.

Have fun, Pythagoras. You've succeeded in driving me from the thread.

Justin