For the related article discussing the Hebrew name Yeshu, as found in Talmud and other Jewish literature, see Yeshu. For the Hebrew or Aramaic name, see Yeshua.
There are several passages in the Talmud which are believed by some scholars to be references to Jesus. The name used in the Talmud is "Yeshu", the Aramaic vocalization (although not spelling) of the Hebrew name Yeshua.[1][2]
Most Talmudic stories which figure around an individual named "Yeshu" are framed in time periods which do not synchronize with one other, nor do they align with the scholarly consensus of Jesus' lifetime, with chronological discrepancies sometimes amounting to as much as a century before or after the accepted dates of Jesus' birth and death.[3][4][5] This apparent multiplicity of "Yeshu"s within the text has been used to defend the Talmud against Christian accusations of blaspheming Jesus since at least the 13th century.[6]
In the modern era, there has been a variance of views among scholars of the possible references to Jesus in the Talmud, depending partly on presuppositions as to the extent to which the ancient rabbis were preoccupied with Jesus and Christianity.[7] 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.[8] 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.[9] "Minimalists" include Jacob Zallel Lauterbach (1951) ("who recognize[d] only relatively few passages that actually have Jesus in mind"),[8] while "maximalists" include R. Travers Herford (1903) (who concluded that most of the references related to Jesus, but were non-historical oral traditions which circulated among Jews),[10][11] and Peter 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).[12][page needed]
The first Christian censorship of the Talmud occurred in the year 521.[13] More extensive censorship began during the Middle Ages, notably under the directive of Pope Gregory IX.[14][15] Catholic authorities accused the Talmud of blasphemous references to Jesus and Mary.
Some editions of the Talmud, particularly those from the 13th century onward, are missing these references, removed either by Christian censors,[16] by Jews themselves out of fear of reprisals, or possibly lost through negligence or accident.[17] However, most editions of the Talmud published since the early 20th century have seen the restoration of most of these references.[citation needed]
^Ilan, Tal (2002). Lexicon of Jewish Names in Late Antiquity Part I: Palestine 330 BCE–200 CE (Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum 91). Tübingen, Germany: J.C.B. Mohr. p. 129.
^Stern, David (1992). Jewish New Testament Commentary. Clarksville, Maryland: Jewish New Testament Publications. pp. 4–5.
^Delbert Burkett (2010). The Blackwell Companion to Jesus. p. 220. "That is to say, varying presuppositions as to the extent to which the ancient rabbis were preoccupied with Jesus and Christianity can easily predetermine which texts might be identified and interpreted as having him in mind."
^ abThe Blackwell Companion to Jesus, ed. Burkett p. 220 2010 "Accordingly, scholars' analyses range widely from minimalists (e.g., Lauterbach 1951) – who recognize only relatively few passages that actually have Jesus in mind – to moderates (e.g., Herford [1903] 2006), to maximalists (Klausner 1943 ... especially Schafer)"
^Maurice Wiles, Edward Yarnold, P. M. Parvis (1997). Papers presented at the Thirteenth International Conference on Patristic Studies. p. 398 "These scholars represent a school of thought, which can be described as minimalist, as it argues that there was minimal ... including Horbury, who accepts some aspects of the minimalist argument and does not dismiss Harnack outright."
^James Carleton Paget (2010). Jews, Christians and Jewish Christians in Antiquity. p. 279. "44 Herford 1903, 63. 45 Even Herford, who takes a maximalist view of this material, agrees with this conclusion. "If the summary of the Jesus-Tradition, given above be examined, it will be found to contain little, if anything".
^Lasker, p. xxi, summarizes Herford's conclusions; R. Travers Herford (1903), Christianity in Talmud and Midrash, London: Williams & Norgate (reprint New York, KTAV, 1975)
^Peter Schäfer, Jesus in the Talmud, Princeton University Press, 2007.
^Reverend James Parkes, The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue, p. 392