This from Terry Mattingly:
The Talmud once included this example from the Sanhedrin.
"On the eve of Passover they hung Jesus of Nazareth," said the passage, which was censored in the 16th century to evade the wrath of Christians. "The herald went out before him for 40 days saying, 'Jesus goes forth to be stoned, because he has practiced magic, enticed and led astray Israel. Anyone who knows anything in his favor, let him come and declare concerning him.' And they found nothing in his favor." . . .
Writing in 12th-century Egypt, the great Jewish sage Maimonides summed up the ancient texts.
"Jesus of Nazareth," he proclaims, in his Letter to Yemen, " ... impelled people to believe that he was a prophet sent by God to clarify perplexities in the Torah, and that he was the Messiah that was predicted by each and every seer. He interpreted the Torah and its precepts in such a fashion as to lead to their total annulment, to the abolition of all its commandments and to the violation of its prohibitions.
"The sages, of blessed memory, having become aware of his plans before his reputation spread among our people, meted out fitting punishment to him."Posted by Clifton at February 18, 2004 09:24 AM | TrackBack
I came across the discussion of Mel Gibson's movie Passion of Christ. Some argue it's anti-semitic. Now John Kerry is Jewish. The movie is said to be very intense and anti- Semitic and set to be a huge box office success. I was wondering if Dean and Edwards see the movie as a deus ex machina, that's going to destroy the Kerry candidacy and that's what they were waiting for and not so much Kerry's intern problem
Posted by: Ricky Vandal at February 18, 2004 11:15 AMUmm, not where I would go with it, but, well, uh, okay . . .
Posted by: Clifton D. Healy at February 18, 2004 01:42 PMSo where would you go with it, Clifton? What's your goal in posting these quotes, especially deprived of the context of Mattingly's careful article?
Posted by: mesh at February 18, 2004 02:33 PMMesh:
Well, while the quotes are immediately deprived of the context, since I provide the link to the original article, those with enough energy and curiosity can easily and quickly determine the context for themselves.
But to play my hand more openly: No other agenda other than to ensure that the discussion/criticism surrounding Gibson's movie includes important factors that would make for more balanced and wise, open and honest dialogue. To date, that has rarely been the case.
Posted by: Clifton D. Healy at February 18, 2004 08:44 PMSounds like a good idea to me. I hope much of the vitriol surrounding the movie will dissipate once the film is actually seen by crowds. But I sort of doubt it.
Posted by: mesh at February 18, 2004 10:44 PM