처음으로
esesang91.com설립 개요
내적치유관련자료
개혁주의&청교도
상담 Counseling
|
|
Jesus in the Talmud
Jesus in the Talmud From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_the_Talmud#Healing_in_the_name_of_Jesus The Talmud contains passages that some scholars have concluded are references to Christian traditions about Jesus. The history of textual transmission of these passages is complex and scholars are not agreed concerning which passages are original, and which were added later or removed later in reaction to the actions of Christians. Scholars are also divided on the relationship of the passages, if any, to the historical Jesus, though most modern scholarship views the passages as reaction to Christian proselytism rather than having any meaningful trace of a historical Jesus. During the disputations in the Middle Ages, advocates for the Christian church alleged that the Talmud contained insulting references to Jesus and his mother, Mary. Jewish apologists during the disputations denied that the references were to Jesus, and claimed they referred to other individuals. The disputations led to many of the references being removed (censored) from subsequent editions of the Talmud. In the modern era there have been a variance of views among scholars of the references to possible Jesus in the Talmud, depending partly on presuppositions as to the extent to which the ancient rabbis were preoccupied with Jesus and Christianity.[1] This range of views among modern scholars on the subject has been described as a range from "minimalists" who see few passages with reference to Jesus, to "maximalists" who see many passages having reference to Jesus.[2] These terms "minimalist" and "maximalist" are not unique to discussion of the Talmud text, they are also used in discussion of academic debate on other aspects of Jewish vs. Christian and Christian vs. Jewish contact and polemic in the early centuries of Christianity, such as the Adversus Iudaeos genre.[3] "Minimalists" include Jacob Z. Lauterbach (1951) ("who recognize[d] only relatively few passages that actually have Jesus in mind"),[2] while "maximalists" include Herford (1903), (who concluded that most of the references related to Jesus, but were non-historical oral traditions which circulated among Jews),[4][5] and Schäfer (2007) (who concluded that the passages were parodies of parallel stories about Jesus in the New Testament incorporated into the Talmud in the 3rd and 4th centuries that illustrate the inter-sect rivalry between Judaism and nascent Christianity[6][page needed]). Some editions of the Talmud are missing some of the references, which were removed either by Christian censors starting in the 13th century,[7] or by Jews themselves due to fear of antisemitic reprisals, or some were possibly lost by negligence or accident.[8] However, most modern editions published since the early 20th century have restored most of the references. [edit] History
Starting in 20th century the topic of Jesus in Judaic literature became subject to more unbiased, scholarly research, such as Das Leben Jesu nach judischen Quellen written in 1902 by Samuel Krauss, which was the first scholarly analysis of the Judaic anti-Christian polemic Toledot Yeshu (The Biography of Jesus).[11] In 1903, Unitarian scholar R. Travers Herford wrote Christianity in Talmud and Midrash, which became the standard work on the topic in the Christian world, and he concluded that a large number of references referred to Jesus, not as a historical individual, but instead as the messiah of Christianity.[13] In 1910, Hermann Strack wrote Jesus, die Häretiker und die Christen nach den altesten judischen Angaben, which found no evidence of a historical Jesus in the Talmud.[11] In 1922 Joseph Klausner wrote Yeshu ha-Notzri (Jesus of Nazareth) which concluded that "the evidence [for a historical Jesus] in the Talmud is scanty and does not contribute much to our knowledge of the historical Jesus; much of it is legendary and reflects the Jewish attempt to counter Christian claims and reproaches" but he did conclude some material was historically reliable.[14] In 1950 Morris Goldstein wrote Jesus in the Jewish Tradition, including sections on the Toledoth Yeshu. In 1951, Jacob Z. Lauterbach wrote the essay Jesus in the Talmud.[15] In 1978 Johann Maier wrote Jesus von Nazareth in der talmudischen Überlieferung, in which he concludes that there is virtually no evidence of the historical Jesus in the Talmud, and that the references to Jesus were "legendary" and probably added late in the Talmudic era "as a reaction to Christian provocations".[16] In 2007, Peter Schäfer wrote Jesus in the Talmud in which he tried to find a middle ground between "anti-Jewish Christian" and "apologetic Jewish" interpretations. He concluded that the references to Jesus (as the messiah of Christianity) were included in the early (3rd and 4th century) versions of the Talmud, and that they were parodies of New Testament narratives.[17] [edit] In the context of Christian-Judaic polemicsIn the first few centuries CE, there were many sects of Judaism (such as Pharisees, Essenes, and Sadducees) each claiming to be the correct faith.[18] Some scholars treat Christianity, during that era, referred to as Early Christianity, as simply one of many sects of Judaism.[19] Some sects wrote polemics advocating their position, and occasionally disparaging rival sects. Some scholars view the depictions of Jesus in the Talmud as a manifestation of those inter-sect rivalries – thus the depictions can be read as polemics by the rabbinic authors of the Talmud which indirectly criticized the rival sect (Christianity), which was growing and becoming more dominant.[20][edit] Relationship to New TestamentPeter Schäfer concluded that the references were not from the early tannaitic period (1st and 2nd centuries) but rather from the 3rd and 4th centuries, during the amoraic period.[21] He asserts that the references in the Babylonian Talmud were "polemical counter-narratives that parody the New Testament stories, most notably the story of Jesus' birth and death"[22] and that the rabbinical authors were familiar with the Gospels (particularly the Gospel of John) in their form as the Diatessaron and the Peshitta, the New Testament of the Syrian Church. Schäfer argues that the message conveyed in the Talmud was a "bold and self-confident" assertion of correctness of Judaism, maintaining that "there is no reason to feel ashamed because we rightfully executed a blasphemer and idolater."[23]By way of comparison the New Testament itself also documents conflict with rabbinical Judaism, for example in the John 8:41 charge "We are not born of fornication."[24] and "Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan and have a demon?"[25] and in return in the description in Revelation of a "synagogue of Satan."[26] [edit] Early anti-Christian sentimentsIn contrast to Peter Schäfer, Daniel J. Lasker suggests that the Talmudic stories about Jesus are not deliberate, provocative polemics, but instead demonstrate "embryonic" Jewish objections to Christianity which would later "blossom into a full-scale Jewish polemical attack on Christianity [the Toledoth Yeshu]".[27][edit] Ambivalent relationshipJeffrey Rubenstein has argued that the accounts in Chullin and Avodah Zarah ("Idolatry") reveal an ambivalent relationship between rabbis and Christianity. In his view the tosefta account reveals that at least some Jews believed Christians were true healers, but that the rabbis saw this belief as a major threat. Concerning the Babylonian Talmud account in Avoda Zarah, Boyarin views Jacob of Sechania as a Christian preacher and understands Rabbi Eliezer's arrest for minuth ("heresy") as an arrest by the Romans for practising Christianity. When the Governor (the text uses the word for chief judge) interrogated him, the Rabbi answered that he "trusted the judge." Boyarin has suggested that this was the Jewish version of the Br'er Rabbit approach to domination, which he contrasts to the strategy of many early Christians, who proclaim their beliefs in spite of the consequences (i.e. martyrdom). Although Rabbi Eliezer was referring to God, the Governor interpreted him to be referring to the Governor himself, and freed the Rabbi. According to them the account also reveals that there was greater contact between Christians and Jews in the 2nd century than commonly believed. They view the account of the teaching of Yeshu as an attempt to mock Christianity. According to Rubenstein, the structure of this teaching, in which a Biblical prooftext is used to answer a question about Biblical law, is common to both the Rabbis and early Christians. The vulgar content, however, may have been used to parody Christian values. Boyarin considers the text to be an acknowledgment that Rabbis often interacted with Christians, despite their doctrinal antipathy.[28][edit] Disputations and censorshipSee also: Criticism of the Talmud During the Middle Ages a series of debates on Judaism were staged by the Roman Catholic – including the Disputation of Paris (1240), the Disputation of Barcelona (1263), and Disputation of Tortosa (1413–14)- and during those disputations, Jewish converts to Christianity, such as Nicholas Donin (in Paris) and Pablo Christiani (in Barcelona) claimed the Talmud contained insulting references to Jesus.[29][30][31]During these disputations the representatives of the Jewish communities offered various defences to the charges of the Christian disputants. Notably influential on later Jewish responses was the defence of Yechiel of Paris (1240) that a passage about an individual named Yeshu in the Talmud was not a reference to the Christian Jesus, though at the same time Yechiel also conceded that another reference to Yeshu was. This has been described as the "theory of two Jesuses" though Berger (1998) notes that Yehiel in fact argues for three Jesuses.[32] This defence featured again in later Jewish defences during the medieval period, such as that of Nachmanides at the Disputation of Barcelona, though others such as Profiat Duran at the Disputation of Tortosa did not follow this argument.[33] Amy-Jill Levine notes that even today some rabbinical experts do not consider that the Talmud's account of Jesus' death is a reference to the Jesus of the New Testament.[34] Gustaf Dalman (1922),[35]Joachim Jeremias (1960),[36] Mark Allen Powell (1998)[37] and Roger T. Beckwith (2005)[38] were also favourable to the view the Yeshu references in the Talmud were not to Jesus. Richard Bauckham considers Yeshu a legitimate, if rare, form of the name in use at the time, and writes that an ossuary bearing both the names Yeshu and Yeshua ben Yosef shows that it "was not in invented by the rabbis as a way of avoiding pronouncing the real name of Jesus of Nazareth"[39] As a result of these disputations, the Roman Catholic Church ordered the Talmud to be censored. Many manuscript editions had references to Jesus removed or changed, and subsequent manuscripts sometimes omitted the passages entirely. Following the invention of the printing press, the Talmud was banned by the Pope in 1553,[citation needed] and placed on the Index Expurgatorius in 1559.[citation needed] All printed editions of the Talmud, including the Basel Talmud and the Vilna Edition Shas, were censored. In the 20th century, new editions began restoring the censored material, such as in the 1935 English Soncino edition.[40] [edit] Text-criticism, versions, and alterationsStarting in the 13th century, manuscripts of the Talmud were sometimes altered in response to the criticisms made during the disputations, and in response to orders from the Christian church. Existing manuscripts were sometimes altered (for example, by erasure) and new manuscripts often omitted the passages entirely. Peter Schäfer compared several editions and documented some alterations as illustrated in the following table:[41]
[edit] As evidence of the historical JesusMany scholars argue that the Talmud provides no evidence of Jesus as a historical individual, instead they view the Talmudic references as reaction to Jesus as the messiah of Christianity. Van Voorst (2000) describes this as a spectrum of opinion:
[edit] Possible Talmudic referencesThere are several Talmudic passages that are said to be referring to Jesus. The following are among the those considered the most controversial, contested, and possibly the most notable. [45][46][47]Our rabbis taught Jesus the Nazarene had five disciples, and these are they: Matthai, Naqqai, Netzer, Buni, and Todah. [48][49][50][51] The master said: Jesus the Nazarene practiced magic and deceived and led Israel astray. [52][53] [54][55] "Jesus son of Stada is Jesus son of Pandira?" Rav Hisda said, "The husband was Stada and the lover was Pandera." "But was not the husband Pappos son of Yehuda and the mother Stada?" No, his mother was Miriam, who let her hair grow long and was called Stada. Pumbedita says about her: "She was unfaithful to her husband." [56][57][58][59] On (Sabbath eve and) the eve of Passover, Jesus the Nazarene was hanged and a herald went forth before him forty days heralding, "Jesus the Nazarene is going forth to be stoned because he practiced sorcery and instigated and seduced Israel to idolatry. Whoever knows anything in defense may come and state it." But since they did not find anything in his defense they hanged him on (Sabbath eve and) the eve of Passover. Ulla said: "Do you suppose that Jesus the Nazarene was one for whom a defense could be made? He was a mesit (someone who instigated Israel to idolatry), concerning whom the Merciful [God] says: Show him no compassion and do not shield him (Deut. 13:9). With Jesus the Nazarene it was different. For he was close to the government.[49][60][61][62] [edit] Specific ReferencesA sorcerer – Sanhedrin 43a[63] relates the trial and execution of a sorcerer named Jesus ("Yeshu" in Hebrew) and his five disciples. The sorcerer is stoned and hanged on the Eve of Passover.[64]Student paying too much attention to an inn-keepers wife – Sanhedrin 107[65] tells of a Jesus ("Yeshu") "offended his teacher by paying too much attention to the inn-keeper's wife. Jesus wished to be forgiven, but [his rabbi] was too slow to forgive him, and Jesus in despair went away and put up a brick [idol] and worshipped it."[66] Boiled in excrement – In Gittin 56b, 57a[67] 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.[68][69] "May his name and memory be blotted out" – Some critics claim that the Hebrew name Yeshu is not a short form of the name Yeshua, but rather an acrostic for the Hebrew phrase "may his name and memory be blotted out" created by taking the first letter of the Hebrew words.[70] In addition, at the 1240 Disputation in Paris, Donin presented the allegation that the Talmud was blasphemous towards Mary, the mother of Jesus, ("Miriam" in Hebrew) and this criticism has been repeated by many Christian sources.[71] The texts cited by critics include Sanhedrin 67a,[72] Sanhedrin 106a,[73] and Shabbath 104b.[74] However, the references to Mary are not specific, and some assert that they do not refer to Jesus' mother, or perhaps refer to Mary Magdalen.[75] [edit] SummaryScholars have identified the following references in the Talmud that some conclude refer to Jesus, regarded as the messiah of Christiainty:[76]
[edit] As a sorcerer with disciplesSanhedrin 43a relates the trial and execution of Jesus and his five disciples.[77] Here, Jesus is a sorcerer who has enticed other Jews to apostasy. A herald is sent to call for witnesses in his favour for forty days before his execution. No one comes forth and in the end he is stoned and hanged on the Eve of Passover. His five disciples, named Matai, Nekai, Netzer, Buni, and Todah are then tried. Word play is made on each of their names, and they are executed. It is mentioned that leniency could not be applied because of Jesus' influence with the royal government (malkhut). The passages that specifically mention Jesus, as the messiah of Christianity, are:[78]
[edit] Healing in the name of JesusScholars have identified passages in the Talmud and associated Talmudic texts that involve invoking Jesus' name, as the messiah of Christianity, in order to perform magical healing:[78]
|
| 
|
