It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Scholars have identified the following references in the Talmud that some conclude refer to Jesus:
Jesus as a sorcerer with disciples (b Sanh 43a-b)
Healing in the name of Jesus (Hul 2:22f; AZ 2:22/12; y Shab 124:4/13; QohR 1:8; b AZ 27b)
As a torah teacher (b AZ 17a; Hul 2:24; QohR 1:8)
As a son or disciple that turned out badly (Sanh 103a/b; Ber 17b)
As a frivolous disciple who practiced magic and turned to idolatry (Sanh 107b; Sot 47a)
Jesus' punishment in afterlife (b Git 56b, 57a)
Jesus' execution (b Sanh 43a-b)
Jesus as the son of Mary (Shab 104b, Sanh 67a)
If Muhammad could then why not Rome and Josephus?
originally posted by: NOTurTypical
originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: windword
I wouldn't be surprised if Josephus invented Jesus for Rome. There are some interesting similarities between Josephus' life and Jesus'.
Josephus invented Jesus for Rome? The same Rome that didn't legalize Christianity or make it the state religion until the 4th century A.D.?
originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: windword
No, scholars doubt some references, not all:
Scholars have identified the following references in the Talmud that some conclude refer to Jesus:
Jesus as a sorcerer with disciples (b Sanh 43a-b)
Healing in the name of Jesus (Hul 2:22f; AZ 2:22/12; y Shab 124:4/13; QohR 1:8; b AZ 27b)
As a torah teacher (b AZ 17a; Hul 2:24; QohR 1:8)
As a son or disciple that turned out badly (Sanh 103a/b; Ber 17b)
As a frivolous disciple who practiced magic and turned to idolatry (Sanh 107b; Sot 47a)
Jesus' punishment in afterlife (b Git 56b, 57a)
Jesus' execution (b Sanh 43a-b)
Jesus as the son of Mary (Shab 104b, Sanh 67a)
(same link)
originally posted by: windword
originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: windword
No, scholars doubt some references, not all:
Scholars have identified the following references in the Talmud that some conclude refer to Jesus:
Jesus as a sorcerer with disciples (b Sanh 43a-b)
Healing in the name of Jesus (Hul 2:22f; AZ 2:22/12; y Shab 124:4/13; QohR 1:8; b AZ 27b)
As a torah teacher (b AZ 17a; Hul 2:24; QohR 1:8)
As a son or disciple that turned out badly (Sanh 103a/b; Ber 17b)
As a frivolous disciple who practiced magic and turned to idolatry (Sanh 107b; Sot 47a)
Jesus' punishment in afterlife (b Git 56b, 57a)
Jesus' execution (b Sanh 43a-b)
Jesus as the son of Mary (Shab 104b, Sanh 67a)
(same link)
The key word is "SOME". The fact is the Talmud, and any perceived reference to "Jesus" has been butchered by Christians who censored, edited and interpolated the texts, so it is ALL unreliable.
It's not worth the debate.
originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: windword
No, scholars doubt some references, not all:
Scholars have identified the following references in the Talmud that some conclude refer to Jesus:
Jesus as a sorcerer with disciples (b Sanh 43a-b)
Healing in the name of Jesus (Hul 2:22f; AZ 2:22/12; y Shab 124:4/13; QohR 1:8; b AZ 27b)
As a torah teacher (b AZ 17a; Hul 2:24; QohR 1:8)
As a son or disciple that turned out badly (Sanh 103a/b; Ber 17b)
As a frivolous disciple who practiced magic and turned to idolatry (Sanh 107b; Sot 47a)
Jesus' punishment in afterlife (b Git 56b, 57a)
Jesus' execution (b Sanh 43a-b)
Jesus as the son of Mary (Shab 104b, Sanh 67a)
(same link)
Take one of the most famous tales from the New Testament, which starts in John 7:53. A group of Pharisees and others bring a woman caught committing adultery to Jesus. Under Mosaic Law—the laws of Moses handed down in the Old Testament—she must be stoned to death. The Pharisees ask Jesus whether the woman should be released or killed, hoping to force him to choose between honoring Mosaic Law and his teachings of forgiveness. Jesus replies, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone.’’ The group leaves, and Jesus tells the woman to sin no more.
It’s a powerful story, known even by those with just a passing knowledge of the Bible. It was depicted in Mel Gibson’s movie The Passion of the Christ and is often used to point out the hypocrisy of Christians who denounce what they perceive to be the sins of others. Unfortunately, John didn't write it. Scribes made it up sometime in the Middle Ages. It does not appear in any of the three other Gospels or in any of the early Greek versions of John. Even if the Gospel of John is an infallible telling of the history of Jesus’s ministry, the event simply never happened. Moreover, according to Ehrman, the writing style for that story is different from the rest of John, and the section includes phrases that do not appear anywhere else in the Bible. Scholars say they are words more commonly used long after that Gospel was written.
originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Grimpachi
As far as your request for historical accounts you will not find that anything was documented during his lifetime. It was decades later before that happened and none were first person accounts.
Yet we accept the historical accounts of Alexander the Great and no historical records of him exist except those written 400 years after he died.
They easily could have!!
originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: windword
There is a more than credible argument in favor of
a risen Christ using only the facts that 95% of critics
concede Windword. Blah hahhhahah! Or whatever.
originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: windword
There is a more than credible argument in favor of
a risen Christ using only the facts that 95% of critics
concede Windword. Blah hahhhahah! Or whatever.