Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Jewish apologetics that "we could not have done it" because of Roman sovereignty ring hollow when one examines the Talmudic account.
1 posted on 10/08/2003 5:24:32 AM PDT by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: All
The American Jewish Committee apparently owes Mel Gibson an apology.

The link is to the Google cache of the article. The ordinary link is broken, and the articles has vanished down the memory hole.
2 posted on 10/08/2003 5:25:40 AM PDT by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All
DON'T MEAN TO BUG YOU.....
BUT CAN YOU HELP?
PLEASE SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC
Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to


FreeRepublic
LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO
CA 93794
Or you can use
PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

STOP BY A BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD
It's on the Breaking News Sidebar

3 posted on 10/08/2003 5:29:55 AM PDT by Support Free Republic (Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hermann the Cherusker
Interesting. A Jewish charge of 'sorcery' would fit very well with the account given by St. John the Theologian in his Gospel: the provoking incidents were the healing of the man born blind, and still more the resurrection of Lazarus.

The resurrection of Lazarus, according to St. John's account is too close to Christ's Passion to allow for a forty-day delay. I'll need to reread the Gospel to see whether the healing of the man born blind could have triggered a trial-in-absentia forty days before Our Lord's Passion.

5 posted on 10/08/2003 9:01:02 AM PDT by The_Reader_David
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hermann the Cherusker
Some balance here:

Jesus' Death Now Debated By Jews

...Ken Bandler, a spokesman for the AJCommittee, said the article was taken down to "avoid confusion" over whether it represented the organization's official position.

[SNIP]

Indeed, the Catholic Church, which burned copies of the Talmud in the Middle Ages, officially censored the Talmud's Jesus references in the 13th century. Even today the standard Vilna edition of the Talmud omits any discussion about "Yeshu," Jesus in Hebrew.

The Jesus omissions began to be restored in the last century, Bayme said. And the passages "are now included in most of the new printings of the Talmud," said Yisrael Shaw of Daf Yomi Discussions, an on-line Talmud service.

"If you do an Internet search for Sanhedrin 43a, you will find that it is one of the favorite sources of the Christians to use as proof of the Jewish murder and hatred of their god," Shaw said.

[SNIP]

Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz, whose Talmud edition has been translated into English, Russian and Spanish, said he believed the Talmudic Jesus is probably not the Christian Jesus.

"It could very well be somebody else" who lived 100 or 200 years earlier because the stories don?t match the Gospel account, he said.

Rabbi Steinsaltz noted that the Hebrew name Yeshu was popular back then and that "stories about the resurrection of dead leaders are a dime a dozen, before Jesus and after him. This is not a historical issue."

7 posted on 10/08/2003 9:54:22 AM PDT by malakhi (Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hermann the Cherusker
Another lie. Gibson does not feature the biblical line about the crowd insisting his blood be on them and their children.
8 posted on 10/08/2003 10:57:56 AM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hermann the Cherusker
Yet it is also important that Jews confront their own tradition and ask how Jewish sources treated the Jesus narrative.

A Jewish friend of my daughter said her parents threatened to pull out her fingernails if she ever mentioned the name of Jesus in their house.

12 posted on 10/08/2003 12:53:23 PM PDT by aimhigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hermann the Cherusker
Mel Gibson bump
20 posted on 10/09/2003 3:04:56 AM PDT by Dajjal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Hermann the Cherusker
The book mentioned in the sources, Christianity in the Talmud & Midrash by Travers Herford, was published in London in 1903, it was only reprinted by Ktav in NJ in 1975. It is an excellent source for all the citations involved.

Reading the (rather few) Talmudic mentions of Jesus it becomes obvious that these comments are rather spitefully made in the third or fourth century, at a time when there was a lot of friction between the early Christians and the Jews. It is fairly obvious that the Talmudic comments know Jesus only by word of mouth from contemporary Christians and not from any historic tradition. Some of the stories link this Jesus with events or people who clearly did not live in the period of the Gospels.

Some of the quotations do not actually appear in the best editions of the Talmud, but appear only in a few old manuscripts -- the common thought was that they were deleted by government (Christian) censors during the Middle Ages, but I think there is a distinct possibility that some of these were not perpetuated in the Talmud because they were either inauthentic or obviously foolish, and not because of Christian pressures.

21 posted on 10/09/2003 10:10:40 AM PDT by DonQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson