The Talmud and Jesus

[inJESUS]

Mary, a hairdresser? These descriptions in the Talmud are not about Jesus Christ. Here is a website that illustrates the inconsistencies between the men described in the Talmud and the actual Jesus Christ:

angelfire.com/mt/talmud/jesusnarr.html

that’s what i got regarding this:

Morey quotes from the Soncino edition of the Babylonian Talmud:

Footnote in Soncino: “Supposed by Tosah, to be the Mother of Jesus; cf. Shab. 104b in the earlier uncensored editions. Her description Megaddela (hairdresser) is connected by some with the name of Mary Magdalene whose name was confused with the name of Mary, the mother of Jesus.”

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I’ve been reading the thread, and I can’t understand why Saint Michael got upset at valke2. He was just telling us what the Talmud says. I expect remarks like the ones in the Talmud from unbelievers (I of course do not agree with them).

I found this thread quite enlightening, because one of my Jewish friends is an atheist who practices Scientology and holds to the theory that Jesus never existed.

I do have a question though, based on decades of knowing many Jewish friends some of whom do not practice the Jewish religion at all.

I’ve noticed that Jewish people can openly say they don’t believe in God or the Torah, or convert to Hinduism, or practice Scientology, or reject Judaism for New Age beliefs, or adopt atheistic Marxism, and their families are still close to them, associate with them, and love them. But GOD FORBID one of them comes to believe in JESUS !! Then, he or she is disowned by his family. What is it about Jesus Christ (as distinct from Hinduism, atheism, Marxism, New Age, etc) that will cause Jewish people to disown family members, yet accept and love their family members when they adopt just about any other non-Jewish belief ?? That puzzles me.

God bless,
Jaypeeto3 (aka Jaypeeto4)

Maybe it’s because of the treatment of the Jews by Christians for the last 1600 years or so. ##​

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

It’s like an encyclopedia. You can pick up volumes easily on Amazon. The Steinsaltz edition is a good english translation.
It holds equal weight with the Tanakh, as far as importance to Judaism.

The Talmud consists of the Mishna, Gemara and other commentaries. The Mishna was written down about 200-400 CE and the the Gemara (which is commentary on the Mishna) about 400 years later (if I remember correctly). The Mishna is what was considered the Oral Torah, that was given with the written Torah to Moses and passed on from generation to generation.

The reason it was oral, I believe, is that it was supposed to remain more flexible and dynamic than words committed to parchment. If you read a page of Talmud you see it is really a long discussion between different rabbis at different times. Not too dissimilar to how American Case Law is set forth in the US.

What is the difference between the Babylonian & Jerusalem Talmuds - if that’s a fair question ?​

 

[Valke2]

I am curious now what does the Talmud say about the Apostles? Why would they continue on if not for a ressurrection? Why not start their own thing and say they are the one instead of it being Jesus? Why die for it?

I am unaware of any Talmudic references to the apostles. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t there.

 

[Valke2]

What is the difference between the Babylonian & Jerusalem Talmuds - if that’s a fair question ?​

the Jerusalme Talmud is more difficult to understand. The majority of Jews look to the Babylonian Talmud.
The Jerusalem Talmud focused more on agricultural laws than the Babylonian Talmud did.

 

[LilyM]

Calling Mary a whore, saying Jesus is boiling in pig semen, we’ve all heard this before, some things are better left not discussed.

Well I for one had heard none of this before Saint_Michael himself was so kind as to mention it :bigyikes:

Well done St Michael You don’t know that Valke had any intention of explicitly mentioning such things.

 

[RomanCrusader]

## Maybe it’s because of the treatment of the Jews by Christians for the last 1600 years or so. ##?​

The Catholic Church always treated Jews good.

 

[Eden]

that’s what i got regarding this:

Morey quotes from the Soncino edition of the Babylonian Talmud:

Footnote in Soncino: “Supposed by Tosah, to be the Mother of Jesus; cf. Shab. 104b in the earlier uncensored editions. Her description Megaddela (hairdresser) is connected by some with the name of Mary Magdalene whose name was confused with the name of Mary, the mother of Jesus.”

Yes, the word “Megaddela” is very similar to the name Mary Magdalene. But Valke is claiming the Talmud story is speaking about the Mother of our Lord, Jesus. Herein lie the problems with this claim:

Problems

1. Mary Magdalene was not Jesus’ mother. Neither was Mary a hairdresser.
2. Jesus’ step-father was Joseph. Ben Stada’s step-father was Pappos Ben Yehudah.
3. Pappos Ben Yehudah is a known figure from other places in talmudic literature. The Mechilta Beshalach (Vayehi ch. 6) has him discussing Torah with Rabbi Akiva and Talmud Berachot 61b has Pappos Ben Yehudah being captured and killed by Romans along with Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Akiva lived during the second half of the first century and the first half of the second century. He died in the year 134. If Pappos Ben Yehudah was a contemporary of Rabbi Akiva’s, he must have been born well after Jesus’ death and certainly could not be his father.

Rather than get upset by the seeming insult to the Blessed Mother which Valke posted in this thread, we should all recognize that the characters in the Talmud which Valke has asserted are Jesus are not Jesus Christ. Valke wants us to believe they are Jesus Christ, but the article I posted earlier is convincing in its conclusions that this is not to whom the Talmud is referring.

The intent of the article (link posted below) which I posted is that, “We will see that a large number of historians and talmudists have addressed these issues and have concluded that either none of these passages refer to Jesus or that they refer to a proto-Jesus, whose life was later obfuscated by the theologically motivated rewriting of history.”

angelfire.com/mt/talmud/jesusnarr.html

 

[Valke2]

Yes, the word “Megaddela” is very similar to the name Mary Magdalene. But Valke is claiming the Talmud story is speaking about the Mother of our Lord, Jesus. Herein lie the problems with this claim:

Problems

1. Mary Magdalene was not Jesus’ mother. Neither was Mary a hairdresser.
2. Jesus’ step-father was Joseph. Ben Stada’s step-father was Pappos Ben Yehudah.
3. Pappos Ben Yehudah is a known figure from other places in talmudic literature. The Mechilta Beshalach (Vayehi ch. 6) has him discussing Torah with Rabbi Akiva and Talmud Berachot 61b has Pappos Ben Yehudah being captured and killed by Romans along with Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Akiva lived during the second half of the first century and the first half of the second century. He died in the year 134. If Pappos Ben Yehudah was a contemporary of Rabbi Akiva’s, he must have been born well after Jesus’ death and certainly could not be his father.

Rather than get upset by the seeming insult to the Blessed Mother which Valke posted in this thread, we should all recognize that the characters in the Talmud which Valke has asserted are Jesus are not Jesus Christ. Valke wants us to believe they are Jesus Christ, but the article I posted earlier is convincing in its conclusions that this is not to whom the Talmud is referring.

The intent of the article (link posted below) which I posted is that, “We will see that a large number of historians and talmudists have addressed these issues and have concluded that either none of these passages refer to Jesus or that they refer to a proto-Jesus, whose life was later obfuscated by the theologically motivated rewriting of history.”

angelfire.com/mt/talmud/jesusnarr.html

Yes. You will see a large number of historians saying otherwise. ANd you will see a large number saying that the errors you listed were either intentionally put there in order to mislead chrsitians, and thus avoid persecution. Or that the Rabbis simply made a mistake regarding the timing of the event, not having that great an interest in Jesus to begin with. You can find both views expressed in Jewish sources.

However, if you are going to say that there is no mention of Jesus in the Talmud, you have to ask “why”. No mention would indicate that he had even less of an impact on the Jewish community than a false messiah would. The Talmud is not shy about mentioning things that are or were harmful to Judaism

 

[Eden]

Yes. You will see a large number of historians saying otherwise. ANd you will see a large number saying that the errors you listed were either intentionally put there in order to mislead chrsitians, and thus avoid persecution. Or that the Rabbis simply made a mistake regarding the timing of the event, not having that great an interest in Jesus to begin with. You can find both views expressed in Jewish sources.

However, if you are going to say that there is no mention of Jesus in the Talmud, you have to ask “why”. No mention would indicate that he had even less of an impact on the Jewish community than a false messiah would. The Talmud is not shy about mentioning things that are or were harmful to Judaism

It doesn’t concern me at all that the Talmud does not mention Jesus. You see, I believe that Judaism lost its authority and its place as God’s Chosen People when they failed to recognize the Messiah. Jesus came to fulfill the Old Testament. What the Jewish people wrote about after they missed the coming of the Messiah becomes insignificant. I mean, if they missed the coming of the Messiah, why am I supposed to be alarmed that they did not write about Him?

 

[Valke2]

It doesn’t concern me at all that the Talmud does not mention Jesus. You see, I believe that Judaism lost its authority and its place as God’s Chosen People when they failed to recognize the Messiah. Jesus came to fulfill the Old Testament. What the Jewish people wrote about after they missed the coming of the Messiah becomes insignificant. I mean, if they missed the coming of the Messiah, why am I supposed to be alarmed that they did not write about Him?

Why would this confuse you? If he’s not mentioned in Talmud, then such an absence would imply that
he either played a much more minor role than the Gospels indicate or he didn’t exist.

 

[Damascus]

Why would this confuse you? If he’s not mentioned in Talmud, then such an absence would imply that
he either played a much more minor role than the Gospels indicate or he didn’t exist.

So, you are saying its actually better to take this view you present here to at least be able to acknowledge his role as someone with a reputation than to not see him mentioned wich implies he was insignifigant.

Tough choices. In the end how would it matter to a non christian which way you looked at it?

Is it because the Muslims view him as a Prophet? Is this an influence? Like, we are the only ones who dont see this jewish man as being anything to write home about but, everyone is talking about him and he was jewish after all, so I need to find something to talk about?

Truly I wonder why the need to talk about him at all?

 

[havemercy]

The Catholic Church always treated Jews good.

Well, unfortunately, some Catholics have not.

 

[Eden]

Why would this confuse you? If he’s not mentioned in Talmud, then such an absence would imply that
he either played a much more minor role than the Gospels indicate or he didn’t exist.

I would expect that the Jews would either not mention Him at all or that they would continue to persecute Him by writing ugly things about Him. So, I suppose that fits well with what has actually happened in the case of the Talmud. The suggestion that Jesus might not have existed is surprising from a scholar like you. We have more evidence from history, archeology, prophecy and non-Christian writers that Jesus existed then we do to prove the existence of most other ancient figures. Take for instance, Hannibal:

bede.org.uk/jesusmyth.htm

 

[Valke2]

I would expect that the Jews would either not mention Him at all or that they would continue to persecute Him by writing ugly things about Him. So, I suppose that fits well with what has actually happened in the case of the Talmud. The suggestion that Jesus might not have existed is surprising from a scholar like you. We have more evidence from history, archeology, prophecy and non-Christian writers that Jesus existed then we do to prove the existence of most other ancient figures. Take for instance, Hannibal:

bede.org.uk/jesusmyth.htm

I didn’t suggest Jesus did not exist, because, as I have stated, he’s mentioned in Talmud (among other reasons). I suggested that if he wasn’t mentioned, it might suggest that he didn’t exist or had a much weaker impact on the Jewish community.

 

[Eden]

I didn’t suggest Jesus did not exist, because, as I have stated, he’s mentioned in Talmud (among other reasons). I suggested that if he wasn’t mentioned, it might suggest that he didn’t exist or had a much weaker impact on the Jewish community.

In reality, Jesus both existed and is not mentioned in the Talmud. The people described in the Talmud have no relationship to the Christ. Either the Talmud is historically inaccurate and chaotic like the Quran with all of these odd descriptions and contradictions that don’t match up or Jesus is not mentioned in the Talmud. I understand that because you are Jewish, it serves your purposes to believe that the characters described therein are Jesus and His Mother, but I believe this theory has been debunked.

 

[Valke2]

In reality, Jesus both existed and is not mentioned in the Talmud. The people described in the Talmud have no relationship to the Christ. Either the Talmud is historically inaccurate and chaotic like the Quran with all of these odd descriptions and contradictions that don’t match up or Jesus is not mentioned in the Talmud. I understand that because you are Jewish, it serves your purposes to believe that the characters described therein are Jesus and His Mother, but I believe this theory has been debunked.

And I understand that because you are christian, it serves your purpose to believe that the characters described in the Talmud are not Jesus and his mother, and that the characters described in the Christian Bible did what it says they did.

 

[Valke2]

WHy would the description of Jesus in the Talmud, as opposed to saying that Jesus isn’t mentioned in the Talmud, serve my “purposes as a Jew”? Considering that the passage in question was not even read by the vast majority of Jews over the last 600 years (at least), I don’t think it’s inclusion or exclusion was particulary important in convincing us that Jesus was not our Messiah.

 

[Eden]

WHy would the description of Jesus in the Talmud, as opposed to saying that Jesus isn’t mentioned in the Talmud, serve my “purposes as a Jew”? Considering that the passage in question was not even read by the vast majority of Jews over the last 600 years (at least), I don’t think it’s inclusion or exclusion was particulary important in convincing us that Jesus was not our Messiah.

I’m just as confused as you are then. What was the reason that you started this thread? I know it wasn’t started out of my concern that Jesus was excluded from the Talmud. I can only guess that you believed that by starting a thread about these characters whom you assert are Jesus and His Mother, that you hoped to plant a seed of doubt about Jesus’ divinity in the minds of Catholic forum members. So, as a member of a faith which denies the divinity of Christ, of course it serves your purpose to post here as though those passages in the Talmud refer to Jesus Christ.

 

[Eden]

And I understand that because you are christian, it serves your purpose to believe that the characters described in the Talmud are not Jesus and his mother, and that the characters described in the Christian Bible did what it says they did.

Well, in Catholic teaching the Talmud is not considered inspired. While it may be interesting for scholars of the Talmud to read what fallible men wrote about ancient hairdressers and their sons and such, this work has no authority over the reality of the Word made flesh, Jesus Christ.