So the section from which this sentence is quoted could have first been written as late as 200 years after the Crucifixion.
ZERO to 200 does not indicate he wrote them on his death bed! LOL!
And even if the section were written near the beginning of the Tannaitic period, this one particular sentence may have been a comment added many years later to the margin of an older copy and accidently included in the text in copies made from that copy.
Actually, no. The Jews recorded historical fact as it happened!
But really, who cares if it was?!?
It's HISTORY man!
This event, recorded in the Talmud, is, at the same time, a witnessed event of history and therefore an undisputed historical fact. To discredit it is highly
unscientific. Though, I would indeed doubt the autheniticy of the allegations against Yeshu, and would also deem necessary to imply scorn on thier part, in referrence to Yeshu [as they would indeed be biased]. It was obvious the man Yeshu existed and was indeed scorned by the Jews.
It is a very valid source of historical fact, imo!
It is known that one of the two references to Christ in Josephus' writings began as just such a marginalia.
This is not Josephus we're talking about, but Jesus HATING Jews!
Sanhedrin 99a
When Messieh comes he will destroy the Christians
Yebamoth 49b
Jesus was a bastard born of adultery
Shabbath 116a
Hatred of Christians commanded in Psalms 139:21
Berakoth 7a
The Divine Presence rest only upon Jews
Orach Chaiim 225,10
Christians and animals grouped for comparison
Abhodah Azarah 78
Christian Churches are places of idolatry
MeH, I can assume you understand that posting information of this sort does indeed testify to the validity of the historical Person of Jesus? For they would be the LAST ones to post it for the sake of authenticating His existance!
The [the Non-Messianic Jews] chose to denigrate the Lord of Glory, rather than obscure Him from the history annuls!
God works around the choices of men, He is THAT big!
1 Corinthians 2:8
Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
It reads as if it was written after Christianity was accepted by Constantine. The writer may have accepted the Crucifixion because it was "well established" in the mainstream (mostly Christian) world, and this is just a spin justifying the death sentence. The animosity against Jews as "Christ-killers" did not surface until well after the Tannaitic period ended.
The Jews weren't in any physical danger until Rome started persecuting them in and around 70AD, well after the addition of this entry into the Talmud.
Have you even bothered to check the link?
This analysis does not invalidate the Gospel. Nothing can do that. But neither can this section of the Talmud prove anything that will validate the Bible to the unbeliever.
Actually, I'm quite confident that historical sources outside of Christianity are indeed required for all the doubting Thomas's out there.
And I believe this is about as good as it gets!
Mind you, there's lots more, but for Jesus hating Jews [not to imply that all Jews hate Jesus, but definately the Sanhedrin, who's authority was renounced due to the Authority of the Christ, yes] to actualy write about Him..
Now THIS is a later addition;After the fires of Rome Tactus set about to recreate the history books;
The Annals by Publius Cornelius Tacitus [15.44]
Such indeed were the precautions of human wisdom. The next thing was to seek means of propitiating the gods, and recourse was had to the Sibylline books, by the direction of which prayers were offered to Vulcanus, Ceres, and Proserpina. Juno, too, was entreated by the matrons, first, in the Capitol, then on the nearest part of the coast, whence water was procured to sprinkle the fane and image of the goddess. And there were sacred banquets and nightly vigils celebrated by married women. But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed.
I also love the previous paragraph when he talks about "noisy gongs and clanging symbols". Good stuff.
1 Corinthians 13:1
If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am become sounding brass, or a clanging cymbal.
Sounds like a thinly veiled insult to me, but w/e