Jesus in the Talmud

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 2767
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Jesus in the Talmud

Post by DCHindley » Mon Nov 28, 2016 8:11 pm

GakuseiDon wrote:Lucian (~150 CE) seems to call Jesus a crucified "sage", but that Christians were gullible idiots.
Gak,

Well in the US of A, they did allow themselves to be hoodwinked into voting for Donald Trump on the flimsy premise that deep down, good ol' Donald is a "born again" Christian, and would grow into a full blossomed one given time and plenty of religious-right "advice" on sensitive matters relating to the "manifest destiny" question, where wealthy men are the rightful leaders of all nations of the Christian world (= Western Europe, N America, South America & Australia) and the "ethnicity of place" question, which is essentially the statement "Wimmin' an' cullered peoples, meanin' anyone black, brown, red, yellow, or swarthy except by application of a spray-on tan, need to learn their place!"

In the "bubble", cut off from external input outside of the glass, this is understandable, but these same folks would be horrified to think of saying things like this to their black, colored or female co-workers, many of whom they actually like and respect as persons, or to their friends and immediate family, who for a variety of reasons are fairly diverse in ethnic or gender make-up. What surprises me more is that the evangelical Christians of the kind I used to know when I was a practicing born-again Christian did not step up more to say "Is this how the Jesus of the Gospels would have responded to the war-zone Refugee question, the life-threat from radical Islam question, or even the Racial equality question?" This is not intended to be critical of those of you who did step up, only a lament that more of you did not step up.

DCH

ficino
Posts: 745
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:15 pm

Re: Jesus in the Talmud

Post by ficino » Thu Dec 01, 2016 5:49 pm

Kris wrote:I finally did hear back from Jacob, and basically, he told me that I would not find any good information regarding what the Avodah Zerah says about Jesus in current Talmudic works. According to him, he studied at Cambridge and he was privy to some "uncorrupted"versions of this book that have material that wasn't edited out in the 1600's. Does anybody know about these earlier editions? Does the Avodah Zerah talk about Jesus being resurrected from the Mount of Olives? I read the Toledat Jeshu and saw that it does talk aobut Jesus performing miracles, etc and being killed. It also talks about one of his magic tricks being that he said the was going up to heaven and so he then rose up. However, a man named Judas was also able to rise up to heaven and he actually peed on Jesus and both fell back to earth. That is all I can find on Jesus being resurrected in the Talmud or Jewish literature. I am mainly interested in how the resurrection may have been interpreted. The way it is described in the article mentioned in my OP seem to portray it is a somewhat positive light, but perhaps it was presented negative, just like everything else about any Jesus in the Talmud was. As a reminder, here is what my OP had regarding the AZ:

The Avodat Zerah, however, says that Jesus did miracles as no other rabbi, that his disciples not only healed the sick but even raised the dead in His name, that after He was crucified He rose from the dead, and that He ascended into heaven from the Mount of Olives. All of that is actually in the Talmud. Even His enemies acknowledged the truth of what He did. This was written by rabbis who were trying to prevent other Jews from believing in Him, but they had to deal with the historicity of His miracles, of His disciples doing miracles, and not only of His crucifixion but also of His resurrection and ascension into heaven—the Talmud admits He did it!
Hey Kris, I have no wisdom on this, but it's good to see you. I hope you're doing well.

At this point, you've amassed more knowledge of the Talmud than most!

I spend a lot of time working on the literary portrait of Socrates, and publishing the odd piece on it now and then. Obviously, Jesus and Socrates are not identical. But the problems of the historical Jesus and the historical Socrates have a lot in common, since neither left any writings. What we have to deal with are literary portraits, and these are heavily fictionalized.

I think someone - maybe you, if you go on with it - needs to pull apart the strands of tradition that are likely to have come to the guys who compiled the Talmudic texts in question. What were their sources? What connection to fact should we think their sources maintained? It's not enough to say, the Talmud records this or that about jesus, since we know it's from 400-500 years later. Go back to anecdotes about Socrates from the Roman imperial period and there isn't much you can establish as fact.

The historian has to start with an analysis of the source material. Amassing quotations from 500+ years after the fact is but the preliminary step.

Kris
Posts: 203
Joined: Wed May 14, 2014 5:48 am

Re: Jesus in the Talmud

Post by Kris » Fri Dec 02, 2016 9:37 pm

Hi Ficinio-- so good to hear from you old friend! I appreciate your point regarding using historical sourcing and methodology. I just get so bothered by some of these people who make assertations but when I try to research their points, I can't because they don't actually quote and fully cite their references. I want to know what was actually written-- not just believe what a people tells me something says. I want to see this version of the Adovah Zerah that Jacob Moriel references. I can't find what he says in any of the online sources-- but when I asked him about that, he said the Talmud was censored by the rabbis trying to hide the fact that they knew Jesus was the messiah. I have only known the talmud to talk negatively about Jesus. Ugh. I just want to know the truth

Diogenes the Cynic
Posts: 482
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 10:59 pm
Location: Twin Cities, MN

Re: Jesus in the Talmud

Post by Diogenes the Cynic » Sat Dec 03, 2016 2:04 am

He's full of shit. it's just that simple. He blatantly lied about Tacitus and Suetonius and there is no chance that Cambridge is sitting on some kind of "uncorrupted" Talmudic account conveniently confirming all Christian claims, and that no one else has ever revealed it . He is absolutely making this up. Either that or he is mentally ill and imagining these things. Sorry to be harsh, but those claims are ridiculous. If such thing existed, it would not be a secret.

User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1180
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Jesus in the Talmud

Post by rakovsky » Wed Dec 07, 2016 4:22 pm

Kris wrote:I sent a few emails to Jacob Prasch to ask him more about what he is asserting in his article. Since he never actually quotes his sources, it is unclear what his sources actually say. I also asked him to clarify some of he stuff he said about Daniel-- he talks about the Yalkut-- I can't even find this anywhere!
The Yalkut Shimoni was written centuries after the Talmud and as I understand it contains rabbis' comments about the book of Daniel as it relates to their views on the Messiah. Sometimes of course rabbis' ideas about The Messiah match Christians' ideas.

I recommend opening the document below and doing a word search in it for the word Yalkut, because it talks about this connection.

http://philologos.org/__eb-lat/appen09.htm

Let us know what you find about the Yalkut connection.

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com

User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1180
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Jesus in the Talmud

Post by rakovsky » Wed Dec 07, 2016 4:31 pm

DCHindley wrote:
GakuseiDon wrote:Lucian (~150 CE) seems to call Jesus a crucified "sage", but that Christians were gullible idiots.
Gak,

Well in the US of A, they did allow themselves to be hoodwinked into voting for Donald Trump on the flimsy premise that deep down, good ol' Donald is a "born again" Christian, and would grow into a full blossomed one given time and plenty of religious-right "advice" on sensitive matters relating to the "manifest destiny" question, where wealthy men are the rightful leaders of all nations of the Christian world (= Western Europe, N America, South America & Australia) and the "ethnicity of place" question, which is essentially the statement "Wimmin' an' cullered peoples, meanin' anyone black, brown, red, yellow, or swarthy except by application of a spray-on tan, need to learn their place!"

In the "bubble", cut off from external input outside of the glass, this is understandable, but these same folks would be horrified to think of saying things like this to their black, colored or female co-workers, many of whom they actually like and respect as persons, or to their friends and immediate family, who for a variety of reasons are fairly diverse in ethnic or gender make-up. What surprises me more is that the evangelical Christians of the kind I used to know when I was a practicing born-again Christian did not step up more to say "Is this how the Jesus of the Gospels would have responded to the war-zone Refugee question, the life-threat from radical Islam question, or even the Racial equality question?" This is not intended to be critical of those of you who did step up, only a lament that more of you did not step up.

DCH
Maybe one of your obstacles is not getting a full view of the issues. For example, did you know that Hillary was in promising to back fundy rebels and doing regime change against Assad who was protecting Christians from the fundies? Hillary supported the Iraq war that led to maybe a million deaths, and Trump was against it.

Professed "liberals" who seem surprised at the Trump win seem to be quite surprisingly overlooking some major "liberal" human rights issues to me.

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com

Diogenes the Cynic
Posts: 482
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 10:59 pm
Location: Twin Cities, MN

Re: Jesus in the Talmud

Post by Diogenes the Cynic » Wed Dec 07, 2016 9:59 pm

Trump was for the Iraq War, no matter what he says now. He publicly supported it.

User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1180
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Jesus in the Talmud

Post by rakovsky » Thu Dec 08, 2016 3:33 am

Diogenes the Cynic wrote:Trump was for the Iraq War, no matter what he says now. He publicly supported it.
Thanks for encouraging me to look into this.

In the interview, which took place on Sept. 11, 2002, Stern asked Trump directly if he was for invading Iraq.

"Yeah, I guess so," Trump responded. "I wish the first time it was done correctly."
Source: Buzz feed

Jan. 2003
CAVUTO: If you had to sort of breakdown for the president, if yo u
were advising him, how much time do you commit to Iraq versus how much time you commit to the economy, what would you say?

TRUMP: Well, I`m starting to think that people are much more focused now on the economy. They are getting a little bit tired of hearing,
 we`re going in, we`re not going in, the - you know, whatever happened to the days of the Douglas MacArthur. He would go and attack. He wouldn't talk. We have to - you know, it`s sort like either do it or don`t do it.
 When I watch Dan Rather explaining how we are going to be attacking, where we`re going to attack, what routes we`re taking, what kind of planes we`re using, how to stop them, how to stop us, it is a little bit disconcerting. I`ve never seen this, where newscasters are telling you how - telling the enemy how we`re going about it, we have just found out this and that. It is ridiculous.

CAVUTO: Well, the problem right there.

TRUMP: Either you attack or you don`t attack.

CAVUTO: The problem there, Donald, is you`re watching Dan Rather. Maybe you should just be watching Fox.

TRUMP: Well, no, I watch Dan Rather, but not necessarily fondly. But I happened to see it the other night. And I must tell you it was rather amazing as they were explaining the different - I don`t know if it is fact or if it is fiction, but the concept of a newscaster talking about ­the routes is - just seems ridiculous. So the point is either you do it or you don`t do it, or you - but I just - or if you don`t do it, just
 don`t talk about it. When you do it, you start talking about it.

CAVUTO: So you`re saying the leash on this is getting kind of short here, that the president has got to do something presumably sooner rather than later and stringing this along could ultimately hurt us.

TRUMP: Well, he has either got to do something or not do something, perhaps, because perhaps shouldn't be doing it yet and perhaps we should be waiting for the United Nations, you know. He`s under a lot of 
pressure. He`s - I think he`s doing a very good job. But, of course, if you look at the polls, a lot of people are getting a little tired. I think
the Iraqi situation is a problem. And I think the economy is a much bigger problem as far as the president is concerned.

CAVUTO: Are you still bullish on the markets or you have your doubts now?

TRUMP: Well, I think you have to see what is going to happen with Iraq. I think you have to see what is going to happen with North Korea. I happen to think North Korea may be a bigger problem than Iraq. But you have to see what is going to happen with North Korea. And a lot of things up in the air. You have a lot of balls up in the air right now.And on top of that you have a lousy economy.
VS.
Iraq War
On October 11, 2002, [Hillary] Clinton voted in favor of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq, commonly known as the Iraq War Resolution, to give President Bush authority for the Iraq War.
...
Reporter Carl Bernstein and others have questioned why Clinton would have voted against the Levin Amendment, which would have required President Bush to allow more time to UN weapons inspectors and also would have required a separate Congressional authorization to allow a unilateral invasion of Iraq, if her vote was simply a vote for strong diplomacy.
Source: wikipedia

"Yeah I guess so" & maybe wait for the UN & "the economy is a much bigger problem"
Vs.
Voting to authorize force to invade and voting against letting the UN inspectors do their job

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com

frank Rogers
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:07 pm

Re: Jesus in the Talmud

Post by frank Rogers » Thu Nov 21, 2019 10:46 pm

Kris, I have been trying to hunt down the same quotes you mentioned after hearing Jacob's testimony on youtube. I was curious what his response was on the matter as I have been reading a few books on the Talmud and Jesus. I did read that some Talmudic texts had been purged and edited. Would you still have the email from Prasch I would like to see what he said about Cambridge?

Thanks Bro

Steven Avery
Posts: 546
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: Jesus in the Talmud

Post by Steven Avery » Fri Nov 22, 2019 10:13 am

Kris wrote:
Mon Nov 28, 2016 4:48 pm
The Avodat Zerah, however, says that Jesus did miracles as no other rabbi, that his disciples not only healed the sick but even raised the dead in His name, that after He was crucified He rose from the dead, and that He ascended into heaven from the Mount of Olives. All of that is actually in the Talmud. Even His enemies acknowledged the truth of what He did. This was written by rabbis who were trying to prevent other Jews from believing in Him, but they had to deal with the historicity of His miracles, of His disciples doing miracles, and not only of His crucifixion but also of His resurrection and ascension into heaven—the Talmud admits He did it!
Is this a reference to the texts that Jacob Prasch said he studied some decades back at Cambridge?

Post Reply