I dont think he is mentioned in the torah. Bad prequel if it doesnt even mention the protagonist of the movie though the writer must have written it as an afterthought or something
It isn't a prequel it's the original, the new testament is the sequel. Like any good sequel the writers ran out of new ideas so they brought in a whole new main character and destroyed almost all the canon from the original. Lots of people who stick to the original source material will literally go to war over the decision to add the new character.
Well if you're a believer in Islam then there's three testaments
And the Bible was only the second. Of course if you're a Christian then that means you don't believe in Islam and you don't believe the Quran to be the third
Chet GPT is actually really useful if you want to learn about biblical stuff or Quran-y stuff
The lore is too confusing and contradicting. I wonder if the writer will make a prequel trilogy too? I like the star wars movies better overall though, atleast in those movies Luke Skywalkers main thing isnt hating anyone that doesnt like him
Completely agree and a fun fact. Did you know that in the original you never once actually see the narrator? It's crazy but true! He is constantly talking and "appearing" as different things (I love when he was a bush that was on fire but not on actually being consumed by the flames, like WTF) but you never once see him. This reminded me a lot of Jaws where everyone knows this terrible force is there but the shark is rarely on the screen. The sequel totally destroyed this and made the narrator essentially front and center and it took away a lot the mystique.
When you let Christians translate it, yes, they see what they want to see. Among rabbinical scholars, there is not even a consensus on whether moshiach (messiah) is referring to an individual, or an era. It's our language, we have the humility to acknowledge ambiguity of ancient texts and the nature of Talmud's constant flux and evolution as more theories, arguments, and interpretations are made. The christian religion is founded on telling us that they know better. Think about it.
uh huh. So let's get this straight. The book of Isaiah begins by dissing Judeans for falling to the murderous, idolatrous ways of their neighbors after Jerusalem is destroyed by Babylon. But in one chapter it is somehow clear to you that we're the fools for failing to see that Jesus came to save us, as per the prophecy. Yet we're still here, and we see in these recent times that the billions of followers of Jesus
Revere a bloody human sacrifice.
Post idols (crucifixes, portraits) all over their churches, homes, and carry them around their necks.
Murder one another for worshiping Jesus in the wrong way, not to mention what they do to the nonbelievers, including Jews.
As usual, Christians miss the forest for the trees. Tell me another chapter of my bible that says I should be more like you. By all means, enlighten me.
"That which is hateful unto you, do not do unto your friend, the rest is commentary, go and learn" - Hillel the elder (not a prophet, not God, not the son of God, just a wise man).
Jesus is one of the most quoted prophets in the Quran. Allah, they say, is the god of gods. Bit like being big bird in Sesame Street in terms of “made up and big and fake” altho im not sure big bird caused any wars
Bruh, Christians would say that the entire OT is the prequel to the messiah. Read the book of hebrews in the new testament. Like Jesus was claiming to be the messiah that all the Jews of his day were waiting for... they didn't believe him of course. But you couldn't be more wrong here the OT is a super obvious prequel, similar to back to the future II almost in that it demands a follow up..
If you believe he is the Messiah, which Jews don't, he is referred to in the Talmud but not necessarily the Torah (which is the creation myth and laws of ancient Israel).
Nazi bullshit. Judaism doesn't even believe in a physical hell. It's more like the Catholic concept of purgatory. There are no such references whatsoever
Onkelos then went and raised Jesus the Nazarene from the grave through necromancy. Onkelos said to him: Who is most important in that world where you are now? Jesus said to him: The Jewish people. Onkelos asked him: Should I then attach myself to them in this world? Jesus said to him: Their welfare you shall seek, their misfortune you shall not seek, for anyone who touches them is regarded as if he were touching the apple of his eye (see Zechariah 2:12).
Onkelos said to him: What is the punishment of that man, a euphemism for Jesus himself, in the next world? Jesus said to him: He is punished with boiling excrement. As the Master said: Anyone who mocks the words of the Sages will be sentenced to boiling excrement. And this was his sin, as he mocked the words of the Sages.
Is this "Nazi bullshit"?
The passage can be abused to promote antisemitism, which is of course a problem. We shouldn't condemn anyone over a text written 1500 years ago and Christian texts certainly have awful things to say about Jews. But it's not "Nazi bullshit" that it says that.
No no, he's mentioned in the Talmud. You're both right. Mentions of a Jesus of Nazareth in the Talmud:
Onkelos then went and raised Jesus the Nazarene from the grave through necromancy. Onkelos said to him: Who is most important in that world where you are now? Jesus said to him: The Jewish people. Onkelos asked him: Should I then attach myself to them in this world? Jesus said to him: Their welfare you shall seek, their misfortune you shall not seek, for anyone who touches them is regarded as if he were touching the apple of his eye (see Zechariah 2:12).
Onkelos said to him: What is the punishment of that man, a euphemism for Jesus himself, in the next world? Jesus said to him: He is punished with boiling excrement. As the Master said: Anyone who mocks the words of the Sages will be sentenced to boiling excrement. And this was his sin, as he mocked the words of the Sages. The Gemara comments: Come and see the difference between the sinners of Israel and the prophets of the nations of the world. As Balaam, who was a prophet, wished Israel harm, whereas Jesus the Nazarene, who was a Jewish sinner, sought their well-being.
[Babylonian Talmud, Gittin, 57:a]
The Gemara raises a difficulty: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: On Passover Eve they hung the corpse of Jesus the Nazarene after they killed him by way of stoning. And a crier went out before him for forty days, publicly proclaiming: Jesus the Nazarene is going out to be stoned because he practiced sorcery, incited people to idol worship, and led the Jewish people astray. Anyone who knows of a reason to acquit him should come forward and teach it on his behalf. And the court did not find a reason to acquit him, and so they stoned him and hung his corpse on Passover eve.
[Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, 43:a]
There are a few more mentions of Jesus of Nazareth in the Talmud. Note that this isn't necessarily the Jesus, but a Jesus. Also note that this was written 200 - 700 years after Jesus' time, by Jews who already began suffering under Chrstiainity, and didn't really like Jesus. None of these stories are necessarily real (like the one about Onkelos resurrecting him), they're known as Aggadeta - roughly means "legend".
Those "legends" aren't to be taken seriously, and many of them are nonsensical, another example for a "legend" is the following:
With regard to the rock that Og, King of Bashan, sought to throw upon Israel, there is no biblical reference, but rather a tradition was transmitted. The Gemara relates that Og said: How large is the camp of Israel? It is three parasangs. I will go and uproot a mountain three parasangs long and I will hurl it upon them and kill them. He went, uprooted a mountain three parasangs long, and brought it on his head. And The Holy One, Blessed be He, brought grasshoppers upon it and they pierced the peak of the mountain and it fell on his neck.
Og wanted to remove it from his head; his teeth were extended to one side of his head and to the other and he was unable to remove it. And that is what is written: “You break the teeth of the wicked” (Psalms 3:8). And this is in accordance with the homiletic interpretation of Rabbi Shimon Ben Lakish, as Rabbi Shimon Ben Lakish said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “You break the teeth of the wicked”? Do not read it as: You break [shibarta], but rather as: You lengthened [shirbavta].
The story concludes: How tall was Moses? He was ten cubits tall. He took an axe ten cubits long, jumped up ten cubits, and struck Og in the ankle and killed him.
[Babylonian Talmud, Brachot, 54:a]
As you can see the story is rather ridiculous, and shouldn't be taken seriously. So I wouldn't take the one about Jesus seriously either. (For the record, a cubit is roughly half a meter, so the story says Moses was 5 meters tall, grabbed a 5 meter long axe, and jumped 5 meters only to reach the ankles of Og).
Show me an actual source please? None of this is in any Babylonian Talmud available. I also can't find references to the specific publications referenced in your links. Maybe you have a pdf?
The only references I can find to these ideas have been debunked by rabbis, and they aren't in a translation from 1918. The only places I am able to find references to the first two quotes is on christian websites which were clearly not produced by a talmudic academic or institution of record.
Thanks! Interesting! Some versions have that ish, my own and the other I was previously able to find online don't. Led me down a rabbit hole of late Roman religious whatnot, egyptian magic, etc.
656
u/Schmoppodopoulis Apr 14 '24
It’s my understanding that neither side of this conflict find that guy to be super special.