Gittin 57a:3-4
“Onkelos then went and raised Jesus the Nazarene from the grave through necromancy… 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."
Damn, that’s crazy. I’ve never heard of this. Got any other cool, obscure “scripture?”
Edit: after looking it up, I think the part right after is just as interesting:
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.
I said “just as interesting,” to be a bit pedantic. But it’s interesting because I grew up a crazy form of fundamentalist Christian, which involved a lot of fuzzy support for Judaism, by definition, as well as political support based on Israel, because…uh…God or something.
But this portion, referring to Jesus as a sinner, would cause conniptions in any evangelical church. But the idea of Jesus as a sinner is far more interesting than a perfect Jesus. Like Batman vs. Superman.
Gittin 57a:3-4
“Onkelos then went and raised Jesus the Nazarene from the grave through necromancy… 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."
Damn, that’s crazy. I’ve never heard of this. Got any other cool, obscure “scripture?”
Edit: after looking it up, I think the part right after is just as interesting:
I’m curious: why do you think it’s more interesting, and why do you think the writers made a difference?
I ask this in good faith (even though I’m an atheist), as I have my own interpretation of this topic and would be keen to know yours.
I said “just as interesting,” to be a bit pedantic. But it’s interesting because I grew up a crazy form of fundamentalist Christian, which involved a lot of fuzzy support for Judaism, by definition, as well as political support based on Israel, because…uh…God or something.
But this portion, referring to Jesus as a sinner, would cause conniptions in any evangelical church. But the idea of Jesus as a sinner is far more interesting than a perfect Jesus. Like Batman vs. Superman.