Peter Schäfer, Jesus in the Talmud (Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University
Press, 2007): 210 pp.
This book is about references to Jesus of Nazareth in the Talmud
(both Palestinian and Babylonian), the “the foundation document of rabbinic
Judaism in Late Antiquity” (1).
The author sees the scattered references to Jesus, Mary, and
his followers as evidence of the early conflict between Jews and Christians (or,
we might say, Christianity as a sect emerging out of Judaism).
Chapter One: Jesus’ Family
This traces rabbinic traditions that deny the virgin birth by
saying that Jesus instead was conceived through an adulterous relationship
between Miriam (who grew her hair long as a sign of promiscuity) and a Roman
soldier named Pandera/Panthera.
This Jewish slur on Jesus was picked up on by the pagan
writer Celsus.
Chapter Two: The Son/Disciple Who Turned Out Badly
Vague references are made to Jesus as a failed son/disciple
who succumbed to sexual immorality.
The author notes here the Gnostic connection of Jesus with
Mary Magdalene as his wife.
Chapter Three: The Frivolous Disciple
Jesus is presented as a heretical and idolatrous disciple of
the rabbis who practiced magic and even worshipped a brick (!).
Chapter Four: The Torah Teacher
The focus here is on Jews who had become followers of Jesus. One
is a disciple named Jacob (James?). Another is called Rabbi Eliezer who was
accused of sexual immorality with a prostitute and use of magic.
Chapter Five: Healing in the Name of Jesus
Discussion is given here to depictions of the followers of
Jesus as “tricksters and imposters” (62) who use of the name of Jesus as a magical
formula to perform exorcisms and healings.
Chapter Six: Jesus’ Execution
This chapter traces vague references to Jesus as one who was
put to death by stoning and hanging for idolatry. The “Bavli narrative” even reveals
“the precise day of his execution: he was hanged on the even of the Passover,
that is, the day before the Passover” (72).
Schäfer notes that the rabbinic authors
even stress that “the Jews took upon themselves the responsibility for Jesus’
execution” (74). He summarizes the message the rabbinic authors wanted to
convey:
… yes, the Roman governor wanted to
set him free, but we did not give in. He was a blasphemer and idolater, and although
the Romans probably could not care less, we insisted that he get what he
deserved. We even convinced the Roman governor (or more precisely forced him to
accept) that this heretic and imposter needed to be executed—and we are proud
of it (74).
He concludes, “What we have in the Bavli is a powerful confirmation
of the New Testament Passion narrative, a creative rereading, however, that not
only knows some of its distinct details but proudly proclaims Jewish responsibility
for Jesus’ execution” (74).
The Talmud thus sees the death of Jesus as “the rightful
execution of a blasphemer and idolater” (74).
Chapter Seven: Jesus’ Disciples
This chapter discusses a tradition in the Bavli following the
execution of Jesus which says he had five disciples (one of whom was named
Mattai—Matthew?) who were also put on trial and executed.
The author suggests that “this forms the climax of the Bavli’s
discussion of Jesus and Christianity…. Jesus was rightly killed, and there is nothing
that remains of him and his teaching after his death” (81).
Chapter Eight: Jesus’ Punishment in Hell
This final section relays a Talmudic tradition about three
notorious heretical figures in hell: Titus (the destroyer of Jerusalem); Balaam
(the pagan prophet); and Jesus the Nazarene.
Titus must repeatedly be burned and have his ashes scattered
over the seven seas.
Balaam is forever placed in boiling semen.
And Jesus is forever placed in boiling excrement.
Final Summary: Jesus in the Talmud
In the closing chapter Schäfer gives a summary of the Talmudic attack
on Jesus and early Christianity.
First, he says “the most prominent characteristic” that
dominates is the charge of “sexual promiscuity” and immorality (97). Jesus is a
bastard. Christianity is an “orgiastic cult” (99). They even engage in
ritualistic cannibalism of babies (a parody of the eucharist).
These charges were also picked up by pagan critics.
Second, they charge Jesus with being a magician and deceiver.
Third, they charge him and his followers with idolatry and
blasphemy.
Rather than being raised from the dead, his fate will be to sit
in excrement in hell.
The author notes that the stronger attacks on Christianity
are found not in the Palestinian Talmud but in the Bavli (Babylonian Talmud).
He surmises this is due to the fact that “Palestinian Judaism
was under the direct and continuously growing impact of Christianity in the
Holy Land” (115), so it is no surprise that the “most graphic polemic against
Jesus” was found in the Babylonian Talmud composed outside of Palestine (122).
He suggests that the Rabbis likely had access to the NT
(perhaps through Tatian’s Diatessaron or through the Syriac Peshitta)
(123).
He takes special interest in John since it seems it seems to
be “the most strongly anti-Jewish Gospel of the four Gospels” (124). He sees it
as having been written in Asia Minor sometime after AD 100.
He adds:
Having been written in the Jewish
Diaspora of Asia Minor, it bears all the characteristics of a bitter struggle
between the established Jewish and emerging Christian communities, a struggle
that was waged by both sides with the gloves off (128).
He ends: “Taken together, the texts in the Bablyonian Talmud,
although fragmentary and scattered, become a daring and powerful counter-Gospel
to the New Testament in general and to John in particular” (129).
Observation: In the current context the NT is often accused
of being antisemitic (Matthew and John, in particular). This study is refreshing
in that it acknowledges that this was a conflict in which both Jews and
Christians were mutually engaged and that the rabbis, at the least, gave as
much as they received.
On the PA:
Toward the end, the author makes reference to the way in which
the PA fits within the overall themes of this conflict between Jesus and his disciples
and the Jews or Pharisees. The discussion begins, “Some of the confrontations
are portrayed as direct discussions between Jesus and ‘the Jews’ or the
Pharisees. When Jesus prevents the stoning of the adulterous woman…” (127-128).
He sees the content of John 8:17ff, in particular, as related to the earlier challenge
of the forgiveness of the adulterous woman.
Schäfer assumes that the PA is part of
the authentic text of John that it fits with the overall theme of conflict or
confrontation. Thus, he presents a cogent internal argument for the authenticity
of this passage and how it fits within the overall narrative and literary goals
of John.
This shows that is it no way irrational to posit that the PA
is consistent with the rest of John, but instead exposes the folly of those who
reject it or scorn it as their “favorite story that’s not really in the Bible.”
JTR
No comments:
Post a Comment