HOME   People do good because they are human, not because they are religious! 

Do not give God any credit for the good they do, they did it!

 

JEWISH RECORDS undermine THE GOSPEL JESUS’ EXISTENCE
 
The Jewish records are supposed to mention Jesus. Christians sometimes use them to prove that Jesus existed.
 
THE JEWS ON THE LIFE OF JESUS
 
The Talmud speaks of a Yeshu but likes to avoid saying his name a lot of the time. We are not certain if the person who seems to be Jesus in it is our Jesus.

The Talmud contains information that dates back to the time of Jesus and the Mishnah part of it was finished and written at the start of the third century AD. The Babylonian Talmud and the Palestine one were completed later. The Rabbis were very strict about learning their material off by heart and any teacher who forgot his material had to relearn it from his students. Forgetting even a single word of the Mishnah was regarded as bad as losing one’s soul (page 164, 165, He Walked Among Us).

The Christians say that it seems that the Jews grew more and more reluctant over time to condemn Jesus by name in case their books would be burned by the growing Christian Church. We read that they did not do this suddenly but over time they were less and less inclined to name Jesus (page 45, The Jesus Event and Our Response). If they were afraid of Christians then why did they name Jesus sometimes even in insulting contexts? Why did they not remove all the references to Jesus? Why not call him (if it is him) such and such a one which they did at times all the time? Why did they leave references to Jesus in? They knew what the Christians were like and knew that if they called Jesus such and such they would still be in bother. The Christians did not have the resources to persecute Jews in every land so we can dismiss Church bigotry for the Jew’s behaviour. The Jews’ behaviour is so bizarre. It looks as if they had figures in their books that they thought might be Jesus but didn’t want to name them Jesus in case Jesus never existed or simply because the evidence for him was a garbled mess. They didn’t want to give the Jesus myth any historical basis.
 
A part of the Talmud called the Barita says that Jesus sneered at the wisdom of Israel and transgressed against it and also quotes him as saying that he said good things about Israel (page 45, The Jesus Event and Our Response). These statements need not be contradictory.

The Talmud speaks of a lot of Jesuses and the Bible Jesus may have been a fictional person based on one of these characters. When the gospels say Jesus taught in the Temple and the Temple Guards did not know him at his arrest and gives lots of clues that Jesus was not well-known, it indicates that there was no such man and that the Talmud might have mistaken the man Jesus was based on for Jesus. The Gospels show then that the Talmud, if it confuses Jesus with other people then it was not because of sloppiness.
 
Mary was said to have descended from kings and princes (b. Sanh., 106 A). If so then the Jews did believe that Jesus was royalty even though the gospels say they did not and even said they had no heir or claimant to the throne but Caesar! The gospels hint that they did not have genealogical proof that Jesus was royal. The Talmud would not say she was royal unless it believed they had. If Mary could prove it she would not have been poor for there would have been so many who would have been pleased to finance her for she could give Israel its king or even Christ king. The Talmud is denying the gospel picture of a poor Mary who had to ride about on a donkey and give birth in a stable because there was no room at the inn.
 
THE TALMUD ON THE DEATH OF YESHU

Here is a quote from The Encyclopaedia of Unbelief, Volume 1, Gordon Stein, Editor Prometheus Books, New York, 1985, page 367). “Jewish traditions on which the Talmud drew persistently place Jesus among these ancient victims [of crucifixion] by dating him somewhere in the 2nd century B.C.”.
 
Some traditions do this. But there are traditions that deny that Jesus was crucified at all. The Talmud and other traditions contend that Jesus was in fact hanged.

 

One wonders how relevant the Qumran community were as regards information.  It may be that this community is only saying what it would do if it could influence Judaism in Jerusalem.  The Temple Scroll reads, "If a man informs against his people, delivers his people up to a foreign nation and betrays his people, you shall hang him on the tree so that he dies. On the word of two and three witnesses shall he be put to death, and they shall hang him on the tree. If a man commits a crime punishable by death, and he defects into the midst of the nations and curses his people, the children of Israel, you shall hang him also on the tree so that he dies. And their bodies shall not remain upon the tree, but you shall bury them the same day, for those who hang on the tree are accursed by God and men, you must not defile the land which I give you as an inheritance (64:6-13).  This is based on the book of Deuteronomy where God says that whoever is hanged on a tree must be buried or he will defile the land for he is cursed.  The Hebrew is confusing for it can mean somebody being killed and then hung on a tree or somebody killed by hanging on a tree.  The wisest course is that the Hebrew means both.
 
The Jewish Toldoth says, "In that same hour he was put to death. It was the sixth hour and the eve of the Passover and the Sabbath. When they had brought him forth to hang him on a tree, the tree broke. This was because the Ineffable Name was with him. Now when the foolish ones saw that the trees were broken under him, they accounted for the greatness of his righteousness. Until they brought him for him the stock of the carob tree for while he was yet alive he knew the custom of Israel that they would hang him. He knew his death and the manner of his being put to death that at last he would be hanged on a tree. At that time he caused by the Ineffable Name that no tree should bare him but over the carobstock he uttered not the Ineffable Name for it is not a tree. It is a plant" (Toldoth 4:19-23).
 
The Talmud says that Yeshu was hanged on the Eve of the Passover. For forty days before that a Jewish messenger went in front of him to let the public know that he would be put to death by stoning. We know the messenger was Jewish for stoning was a Jewish punishment. The Talmud says that the messengers work was intended to give people the opportunity to come forward and testify for him to save him. Nobody bothered so Yeshu was hanged on the Eve of the Passover. So he must have been strung up and then stoned. The Talmud denies the crucifixion for nobody says hanged when they mean hanged on a cross for that is too vague. Hanged seems to mean that Jesus was tied up on a tree or something so that the people could stone him better. The Jews abominated crucifixion and the gospels give the impression that they wanted Jesus on the cross to prove that he was not the Son of God. If so, the Talmud would have been only too happy to clarify things and say crucified, not hanged. It is nonsensical how some scholars assume that hanged is just the Talmud's word for crucifixion. The Talmud states that the Jewish messenger was commissioned to try and save Jesus and it says nothing in his favour was discovered so "they" hanged him. The they is obviously the Jews. Jews did not crucify. Jesus was hanged.
 
Mar Seraphion wrote in about AD 70 that the Jews executed their wise king. This cannot mean that the Jews forced Pilate to kill Jesus. It must mean they stoned him or executed him themselves. Mar Seraphion also stated that the king lived on in his teaching just as Pythagoras lived on in the statue of Hera (page 26, The Jesus Inquest). This is a clear declaration that the resurrection was thought according to Mar Saraphions sources to be a mystical symbol for Jesus being alive in his doctrine.

Jesus died on the cross according to Philippians 2:8. Was he hanged on a cross first and then nailed to it as a warning to rebels? The Talmud denies the nailing for it goes unmentioned and had it been true it would have spoken about it with glee but the Christian scriptures lend credibility to the Talmud in regard to hanging. And why would Jesus have been nailed when he could hang from the rope?
 
The Talmud contradicts the gospel claim that Jesus had to be taken secretly for execution and that Judas was hired to arrange a discreet capture. It implies then that nobody minded if Jesus was going to be stoned because if they cared they had long enough to rescue him. He had too few disciples for them to be of any use. It says that he had five disciples whose names are very different from the gospels. The Talmud also says that the Jews give Yeshu a good chance to clear himself for the purpose of the notice was so that anybody who could defend him would have a good chance to. I reject the statement that the five are leading believers in Jesus who were not disciples of Jesus on the personal level (Josh McDowell’s Evidence for Jesus, Is It Reliable?). There is no evidence in support of this and why would second generation Christians be remembered? They were direct personal disciples of Jesus.

Why would the Jews make any of the Talmud material on Jesus up? They would have liked to say that Jesus was betrayed by one of his own and why would they make it up about the notice to hint that Jesus was not popular for they could have just said it out straight? And why would they have been so ashamed to say that, if most of the people had been led astray by Jesus? Why would they say that Jesus’ mother was royal and then destroy a bloodline by planning to kill her son? Even if Jesus were fathered by a non-Jew they couldn’t prove it and so wouldn’t have taken the risk of destroying him.

Sometimes the New Testament says Jesus was hanged. It is important that Acts 10:39 says that Jesus was slain by being hanged on a tree. This gives the Talmud more weight and so it cannot be as easily dismissed as the Christians like to think. St Paul in the letter to the Galatians claimed that God cursed Jesus for God put a curse on anybody that was hanged on a tree. The curse referred to the gallows. It is possible that Paul was claiming that Jesus was hanged perhaps unsuccessfully and then crucified.
 
The Talmud gives laws that would prove that the trial of Jesus as recounted in the New Testament never happened if they existed at that time. Christians claim that the Talmud made up the laws to discredit the story, which is ridiculous. As if they had nothing to do but battle Christianity which was a predominately gentile religion and the Jews didn’t want gentiles. Why would they go out of their way to prove that the trial never happened? There were many things that would have disturbed them far more that they would have liked to make up lies about to discredit but they left them alone.

The fact that the information given by the Talmud is simpler than the gospels suggests that it is more primitive than the gospels though it may not have been written down until after the gospels were composed. The earlier evidence is given to refute something, the better. The Talmud material is obviously more primitive than the gospels. Stories get more complex as time goes on. If it is invented stuff knowing that the Christian version of events was the right one then why is it so sober? Why is it much more sensible? The saner a story is the more likely it is to be true. Yet Christian frauds use this argument for the gospels being true knowing that it would do a better job of authenticating the Talmud. The Talmud never looks at the gospels which is strange and indicates that its Jesus material preceded the gospels.

The only problem with the Yeshu material is that if there was a Jesus or if the Christians had taken advantage of gaps in the Jewish history to invent one it was most probably about him for there was no way the Talmud would pass over him completely. Instead of attacking Jesus, the Talmud could have reported what others said about him and feign disapproval which was one way of getting the criticisms past the censors. If Christians could have been so wrong about Jesus then he easily might not have existed. And also, if the figure is not Jesus or is somebody that was just confused with Jesus then Jesus probably never existed.
 
Conclusion
 
The Jewish records cannot be used to prove that Jesus didn’t exist but they do make it likely that he didn’t when the information they have on him is so muddled and confused indicating that the traditions about Jesus were like that. The account of Jesus' death differs fundamentally from the gospels meaning that if they got that major fact wrong that the man might not have existed after all.

WORKS CONSULTED

A Concise History of the Catholic Church, Thomas Bokenkotter, Image Books, New York, 1979
Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible, John W Haley, Whitaker House, Pennsylvania, undated
Asking them Questions, Various, Oxford University Press, London, 1936
Belief and Make-Believe, GA Wells, Open Court, La Salle, Illinois, 1991
Concise Guide to Today’s Religions, Josh McDowell and Don Stewart, Scripture Press, Bucks, 1983
Did Jesus Exist? GA Wells, Pemberton, London, 1988
Did Jesus Exist? John Redford, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1986
Documents of the Christian Church, edited by Henry Bettenson, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1979
Early Christian Writings, Maxwell Staniforth Editor, Penguin, London, 1988
Encyclopaedia of Heresies and Heretics, Leonard George, Robson Books, London, 1995
Encyclopaedia of Unbelief, Volume 1, Ed Gordon Stein, (Ed) Prometheus Books, New York, 1985
Evidence that Demands a Verdict, Vol 1, Josh McDowell, Alpha, Scripture Press Foundation, Bucks, 1995
Fundamentalism and the Word of God, JI Packer, Inter Varsity Press, Leicester, 1996
Handbook to the Controversy With Rome, Volume 1, Karl Von Hase, The Religious Tract Society, London, 1906
He Walked Among Us, Josh McDowell and Bill Wilson, Alpha Cumbria, 2000
In Defence of the Faith, Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene, Oregon, 1996
Introduction to the New Testament, Roderick A F MacKenzie, SJ, Liturgical Press, Minnesota, 1965
Jesus, AN Wilson, Flamingo, London, 1993
Jesus and the Goddess, The Secret Teachings of the Original Christians, Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy, Thorsons, London, 2001
Jesus – God the Son or Son of God? Fred Pearce Christadelphian Publishing Office, Birmingham, undated
Jesus – One Hundred Years Before Christ, Professor Alvar Ellegard Century, London, 1999
Jesus and the Four Gospels, John Drane, Lion, Herts, 1984
Jesus Hypotheses, V Messori, St Paul Publications, Slough, 1977
Jesus Lived in India by Holger Kersten, Element, Dorset, 1994
Jesus, Qumran and the Vatican, Otto Betz and Rainer Riesner, SCM Press Ltd, London, 1994
Jesus the Evidence, Ian Wilson, Pan, London, 1985
Jesus the Magician, Morton Smith, Harper & Row, San Francisco, 1978
Jesus under Fire, Edited by Michael F Wilkins and JP Moreland, Zondervan Publishing House, Michigan, 1995
Lectures and Replies, Thomas Carr, Archbishop of Melbourne, Melbourne, 1907
Let’s Weigh the Evidence, Barry Burton, Chick Publications, Chino, CA, 1983
Miracles in Dispute, Ernst and Marie-Luise Keller, SCM Press Ltd, London, 1969
On the True Doctrine, Celsus, Translated by R Joseph Hoffmann, Oxford University Press, Oxford 1987
Putting Away Childish Things, Uta Ranke-Heinemann, HarperCollins, San Francisco, 1994
Runaway World, Michael Green, IVP, London, 1974
St Paul versus St Peter, A Tale of Two Missions, Michael Goulder, Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville, Kentucky, 1994
St Peter and Rome, JBS, Irish Church Missions, Dublin, undated
Saint Saul, Donald Harman Akenson, Oxford University Press, New York, 2000
The Bible Fact or Fantasy, John Drane, Lion, Oxford, 1989
The Bible Unearthed, Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman, Touchstone Books, New York, 2002.
The Call to Heresy, Robert Van Weyer, Lamp Books, London, 1989
The Case For Christ, Lee Strobel, HarperCollins and Zondervan, Michigan, 1998
The Case for Jesus the Messiah, John Ankerberg Harvest House, Eugene, Oregon, 1989
The Early Church, Henry Chadwick, Pelican, Middlesex, 1967
The Encyclopedia of Heresies and Heretics, Leonard George, Robson Books, London, 1995
The First Christian, Karen Armstrong, Pan, London, 1983
The Gnostic Gospels, Elaine Pagels, Penguin, London, 1990
The Gnostic Paul, Elaine Pagels, Fortress Press, Philadelphia, 1975
The History of Christianity, Lion, Herts 1982
The History of the Church, Eusebius, Penguin, London, 1989
The House of the Messiah, Ahmed Osman, Grafton, London, 1993
The Jesus Event and Our Response, Martin R Tripole SJ, Alba House, New York, 1980
The Jesus Hoax, Phyllis Graham, Leslie Frewin, London, 1974
The Jesus Inquest, Charles Foster, Monarch Books, Oxford, 2006
The Jesus Mysteries, Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy, Thorsons, London, 1999
The MythMaker, St Paul and the Invention of Christianity, Hyam Maccoby, Weidenfeld and Nicholson, London, 1986
The Nag Hammadi Library in English, Ed James M Robinson HarperCollins New York 1990
The Pagan Christ, Tom Harpur, Thomas Allen Publishers, Toronto, 2004
The Reconstruction of Belief, Charles Gore DD, John Murray, London, 1930
The Search for the Twelve Apostles, William Steuart McBirnie, Tyndale House, 1997
The Secret Gospel Morton Smith Aquarian Press, Harper & Row, San Francisco, 1985
The Truth of Christianity, WH Turton, Wells Gardner, Darton & Co Ltd, London, 1905
The Unauthorised Version, Robin Lane Fox, Penguin, Middlesex, 1992
The Virginal Conception and Bodily Resurrection of Jesus, Raymond E Brown, Paulist Press, New York, 1973
Theodore Parker’s Discourses, Theodore Parker, Longmans, Green, Reader and Dyer, London, 1876
Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Kittel Gerhard and Friedrich Gerhard, Eerdman’s Publishing Co, Grand Rapids, MI, 1976
Those Incredible Christians, Hugh Schonfield, Hutchinson, London, 1968
Who Was Jesus? A Conspiracy in Jerusalem, by Kamal Salabi, I.B. Taurus and Co Ltd., London, 1992
Who Was Jesus? NT Wright, SPCK, London, 1993
Why I Believe Jesus Lived, C G Colly Caldwell, Guardian of Truth, Kentucky