Sefer Toledot Yeshu (ספר תולדות יש)

[guno]

An excellent work by the talmudists

It ascribes to Jesus an illegitimate birth, a theft of the Ineffable Name, heretic activities, and finally, a disgraceful death. Perhaps for centuries, the Toledot Yeshu circulated orally until it coalesced into various literary forms.


Toledot Yeshu - Program in Judaic Studies Princeton University

 

[HaShev]

Sources for Yeshu of 100bc go beyond Talmud, when I find my list of sources I'll post them here for people to research.

Don't know if they mentioned, but during that same period existed a famous Rabbi named Yehuda (Judas) ben Tabbai who seems to he where they stole the Judas remourseful guilt scene from. I posted this in another thread. The Judas guilty feeling story is partly borrowed (stolen) from the historical figure Yehuda ben Tabbai (spelling?) who wept on feeling guilty for sending an innocent man to his sentence of death. Yehuda was a somewhat annointed figure who was friends with Shimon the head priest of the temple who Salome (wife of king Jannaeus) reinstated. This was in the 85-100bc era where he and Yeshu son of Mary sometimes got confused.
ROME created the villan to represent Judah thus calling him Judas, they did this to demonize and displace blame for killing 2 of the 3christ figures used for their image of a man they renamed Jesus. But also because it was Yehuda of Galilee who opposed Rome's taxes who was used for the King Herod era galilean christ story and by naming the villan Judas (yehuda) you'd never notice, suspect or accept how they converged the christs into one new image.

Source for this Yehuda: Rabbi Yehuda (Judas) ben Tabbai
who had a Witness killed, who conspired to testify falsely. Yehuda did this to show the Tziddukim they were wrong regarding a law, but made a mistake himself, which Shimon ben Shetach (his friend and eventual head priest)pointed out. He thus spent his life crying at the grave of his victim for forgiveness:
-Makkot 5b.

The argument Christians have used about it being written after fact of Christianity is a false argument because 1) Christianity didn't exist as it's known today, many cults of messianic figures existed, but Jesus was not yet created as the icon of their myth converging all these figures.
2)the writers and through their location had no clue about the Nazarenes or christians nor were they threatened by such.
3)Talmud kept great records of famous Rabbis and did not compromise those records with any fake nonsense that has no value to them.
4)talmud was not the work of mockers, they had no reason to mock something that they never heard of existing.

NT however has much evidence of making up accts and Rome changing times and history.
Even John Apochryphon admits they borrowed much from Zoroaster.

 

[shimon]

the original stories were embelished added to and changed and pagan mythologies and beliefs were added...the tale became bigger then life repackaged and sold to the masse.s in an easy to unde.rstand fairytale that captivated and enthralled them... the only problem was it was so far from the original and took on such a new life of its own that the small kernal of truth was lost oR burieD under the centuries of lies and embellishments....if any questioned they were either killed , banished or made an example of... the little minnow became an all encompasing huge all devouring gigantic fish with an incredible appetite to devour everything and anything in its path.....

 

[HaShev]

Ok found the sources: The following excerpt is from the book:"Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up?"by John Blanchard
The mother of Hyrcanus, Salomè, in spite of her being called by another name, showed favour to Jehoshua and his teaching; that she was a witness of his wonderful works and powers of healing, and tried to save him from the hands of his sacerdotal enemies, because he was related to her;
*John was son of Hyrcanus but the writer is calling Yohan Hycanus by his last name since Yohan was Salome's son. And John was despised by the Pharisee, notice similarities to the AD stories (plagiarized/combined).

Sources for the history of (Yeshu) Jesus: philosopher Celsus (178 CE) Christian writer Epiphanius (c.320-403 CE), the Christian apologist Origen (c.185-254 CE) Within the Talmud Shabbos 104, the gemara explicitly discusses the mother being Stada and the father being Pandera. Jerusalem Talmud (Avodah Zerah II 40d)and in the Tosefta on Hullin II, and (Sanhedrin 43a & 67a). This story is further expanded upon in the Tosefta and Baraitas.
2 accounts:
-Dr. Franz Hartman -
& Gerald Massey's Lectures Originally published in a private edition c. 1900


According to the Babylonian Gemara to the Mishna of Tract "Shabbath," this Jehoshua, the son of Pandira and Stada, was stoned to death as a wizard, in the city of Lud, or Lydda,

Jesus ben Stada (or Pandera) was placedin the time period of about 90 B.C. in Lydda, a town Peter is said tohave visited in ACTS.interestingly the early church father Epiphanius around 400 said Pandera was the grandfather of Jesus.
there

 

[Penelope]

Oh the study of Judaism, just another story based on previous people, Yahweh was a tribal God who like the first of everything that opened the womb (called child worship), why would someone study Judaism, which is also just made up astrotheology and full of a mixture of pagan worship. Christianity is a much better belief system, much more advanced. No more sacrificial worship. (Ding) Jews and Hebrews were not monotheistic, and well neither was Yahweh.

 

[HaShev]

Penelope your record is skipping, it keeps playing the same scratch over and over again...

Get yourself a Jewish writer, your shtick is getting stale.

 

[browsing deer]

This is a crock. It is also against jewish law to discuss this kind of thing under the heading of loshon hora.

Simply, he is not jewish, so why worry about him. And he is not among us so we can't discuss him.

 

[shimon]

Penelope your hit and run style is amuzing.... You actually have it opposite which is quite telling in judiasm we worship the gd of abraham isaac and jacob nothing has changed after all these years... Christianity on the other hand is a mix of pagan, mythological and assorted beleaf...once the leaf is removed one finds that your emperor jesus has no clothes and once held up to cold hard truth cant stand up to the test or the scrutiny...

 

[irosie91]

Penelope your record is skipping, it keeps playing the same scratch over and over again...

Get yourself a Jewish writer, your shtick is getting stale.

shev----can you translate peneloooopian for me. What does
"a story based on another people..." mean? what does
"Yahweh was not a monotheist" mean?

 

[irosie91]

Penelope your hit and run style is amuzing.... You actually have it opposite which is quite telling in judiasm we worship the gd of abraham isaac and jacob nothing has changed after all these years... Christianity on the other hand is a mix of pagan, mythological and assorted beleaf...once the leaf is removed one finds that your emperor jesus has no clothes and once held up to cold hard truth cant stand up to the test or the scrutiny...

don't blame Jesus------that poor guy had nothing to do with the development of penelooopie's stupidity or her concept of him

 

[HaShev]

Irosie, Penelope keeps making the same mistaken claims that Yhwh is a borrowed deity even though she has not given one single proof of prexisting mention nor has she been able to refurlte the rebuttle which involved reminding her Yhwh is not a literal name.
The Judaic warnings not to make figures and forms of words goes right over ger head. God is not a man nor form to have a literal name, it's a word description thus having many word descriotions (names).
Yhwh means one who causes to be, similar to the name in the burning bush describing "I am what will be", eluding to the future holy head of the hosts who speaks for and mediates for that Essence we call Creator.
This is why they say there is YHWH (that Essence of Creation) and lesser yhwh (that reflective messenger & mediator of that Essence) =God the creation force of life
and the voice/messenger (lord=king) who is mistaken for God by the ancient age due to not understanding the process=thus called your god, not The God. People miss the subtle nuances of the wording & don't understand who they are receiving from, so naturally they are confused.
Example: Johnny sends an audio message sound faster then the speed of light in the year 2000, Jimmy receives the message in the year 400bc, do you suppose the receiving archaic age Jimmy will assume God is talking to him? Most likely yeah. If God is an Essence not a form then the messenger is always reflective of that essence or in opposition to that Essence but they are not literally the Creator that created even them.

 

[irosie91]

Irosie, Penelope keeps making the same mistaken claims that Yhwh is a borrowed deity even though she has not given one single proof of prexisting mention nor has she been able to refurlte the rebuttle which involved reminding her Yhwh is not a literal name.
The Judaic warnings not to make figures and forms of words goes right over ger head. God is not a man nor form to have a literal name, it's a word description thus having many word descriotions (names).
Yhwh means one who causes to be, similar to the name in the burning bush describing "I am what will be", eluding to the future holy head of the hosts who speaks for and mediates for that Essence we call Creator.
This is why they say there is YHWH (that Essence of Creation) and lesser yhwh (that reflective messenger & mediator of that Essence) =God the creation force of life
and the voice/messenger (lord=king) who is mistaken for God by the ancient age due to not understanding the process=thus called your god, not The God. People miss the subtle nuances of the wording & don't understand who they are receiving from, so naturally they are confused.
Example: Johnny sends an audio message sound faster then the speed of light in the year 2000, Jimmy receives the message in the year 400bc, do you suppose the receiving archaic age Jimmy will assume God is talking to him? Most likely yeah. If God is an Essence not a form then the messenger is always reflective of that essence or in opposition to that Essence but they are not literally the Creator that created even them.

thanks shev----you expressed that one well------penny posts as if the word YHWH is something like the word zeus or santa claus

 

[HaShev]

It's easy to make that mistake because for some dumb reason my ancestors decided to take those cultural deity terms and use them in their language in defined meaning of words thus not capitslized or anthropromorphized.
Example I showed ger like 3 times already: El and Al became the term for God not relating to any similar cultural use for deities. Ra became a Hebrew word to mean Father in Heaven not to be confused with Egypts RA
Shalem to mean completeness & wholeness and symbolic of Evening Star but had little left to do with Canaanite deity except for Night symbolism was left because it eclipses the sun (Baal).
And of course YHWH had defined meaning and nobody has been able to produce prexisting mention of any such deity before Moses using that word. And it wouldn't natter if they did since word usage is not always the same on shared words especially when there is no form placed on these terms.