Tag Archives: New Testament

An Honest Look at the Talmud

Earlier this week we discussed the necessity of the Talmud, and of an oral tradition in general, to Judaism. We presented an overview of the Talmud, and a brief description of its thousands of pages. And we admitted that, yes, there are some questionable verses in the Talmud (very few when considering the vastness of it). Here, we want to go through some of these, particularly those that are most popular on anti-Semitic websites and publications.

An illustration of Rabbi Akiva from the Mantua Haggadah of 1568

By far the most common is that the Talmud is racist or advocates for the destruction of gentiles. This is based on several anecdotes comparing non-Jews to animals, or the dictum of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai that “the best of gentiles should be killed”. First of all, we have to be aware of the linguistic style of the Talmud, which often uses strong hyperbole that is not to be taken literally (more on this below). More importantly, we have to remember that these statements were made in a time where Jews were experiencing a tremendous amount of horrible persecution. Rabbi Shimon’s teacher, Rabbi Akiva was tortured to death by being flayed with iron combs. This is a man who never hurt anyone, who raised the status of women, sought to abolish servitude, preached that the most important law is “to love your fellow as yourself”, and taught that all men are made in God’s image (Avot 3:14). For no crime of his own, he was grotesquely slaughtered by the Romans. Rabbi Shimon himself had to hide from the Romans in a cave for 13 years with his son, subsisting off of nothing but carobs. The Jews in Sassanid Persia didn’t fare too much better. So, the anger and resentment of the Sages to their gentile oppressors sometimes come out in the pages of Talmud. Yet, the same Talmud insists “Before the throne of the Creator there is no difference between Jews and gentiles.” (TY Rosh Hashanah 57a). Moreover, a non-Jew who is righteous, and occupies himself with law and spirituality, is likened to a kohen gadol, the high priest (Bava Kamma 38a).

In fact, the contempt that the Sages sometimes had for gentiles is not simply because they were not Jewish, for we see that the Sages had the same contempt, if not more so, for certain other Jews! The Talmud (Pesachim 49b) warns never to marry an ‘am ha’aretz, an unlearned or non-religious Jew, and even compares such Jews to beasts. In the same way that gentiles are sometimes compared to animals, and in the same way Rabbi Shimon said they should “be killed”, Rabbi Shmuel said that the ‘am ha’aretz should be “torn like a fish”! Why such harsh words for other Jews? Because they, too, do not occupy themselves with moral development, with personal growth, or with the law. Therefore, they are more likely to be drawn to sin and immorality. (This sentiment is expressed even in the “New Testament”, where John 7:49 states that “the people who know not the law [‘am ha’aretz] are cursed.”) After all, the very purpose of man in this world “is to perfect himself”, as Rabbi Akiva taught (Tanchuma on Tazria 5), and how can one do so without study? Still, the Sages conclude (Avot d’Rabbi Natan, ch. 16) that

A man should not say, “Love the pupils of the wise but hate the ‘am ha’aretẓ,” but one should love all, and hate only the heretics, the apostates, and informers, following David, who said: “Those that hate You, O Lord, I hate” [Psalms 139:21]

Rabbi Akiva is a particularly interesting case, because he was an ‘am ha’aretz himself in the first forty years of his life. Of this time, he says how much he used to hate the learned Jews, with all of their laws and apparent moral superiority, and that he wished to “maul the scholar like a donkey”. Rabbi Akiva’s students asked why he said “like a donkey” and not “like a dog”, to which Akiva replied that while a dog’s bite hurts, a donkey’s bite totally crushes the bones! We can learn a lot from Rabbi Akiva: it is easy to hate those you do not understand. Once Akiva entered the realm of the Law, he saw how beautiful and holy the religious world is. It is fitting that Rabbi Akiva, who had lived in both worlds, insisted so much on loving your fellow. And loving them means helping them find God and live a holy, righteous life, which is why Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachmani (the same one who said that the ‘am ha’aretz should be devoured like a fish) stated that:

He who teaches Torah to his neighbour’s son will be privileged to sit in the Heavenly Academy, for it is written, “If you will cause [Israel] to repent, then will I bring you again, and you shall stand before me…” [Jeremiah 15:19] And he who teaches Torah to the son of an ‘am ha’aretz, even if the Holy One, blessed be He, pronounces a decree against him, He annuls it for his sake, as it is written, “… and if you shall take forth the precious from the vile, you shall be as My mouth…” [ibid.]

Promiscuity in the Talmud

Another horrible accusation levelled against the rabbis of the Talmud is that they were (God forbid) promiscuous and allowed all sorts of sexual indecency. Anyone who makes such a claim clearly knows nothing of the Sages, who were exceedingly modest and chaste. They taught in multiple places how important it is to guard one’s eyes, even suggesting that looking at so much as a woman’s pinky finger is inappropriate (Berakhot 24a). Sexual intercourse should be done only at night or in the dark, and in complete privacy—so much so that some sages would even get rid of any flies in the room! (Niddah 17a) Most would avoid touching their private parts at all times, even while urinating (Niddah 13a). The following page goes so far as to suggest that one who only fantasizes and gives himself an erection should be excommunicated. The Sages cautioned against excessive intercourse, spoke vehemently against wasting seed, and taught that “there is a small organ in a man—if he starves it, it is satisfied; if he satisfies it, it remains starved.” (Sukkah 52b)

Anti-Semitic and Anti-Talmudic websites like to bring up the case of Elazar ben Durdya, of whom the Talmud states “there was not a prostitute in the world” that he did not sleep with (Avodah Zarah 17a). Taking things out of context, what these sites fail to bring up is that the Talmud, of course, does not at all condone Elazar’s actions. In fact, the passage ends with Elazar realizing his terribly sinful ways, and literally dying from shame.

Another disgusting accusation is that the Talmud permits pederasty (God forbid). In reality, what the passage in question (Sanhedrin 54b) is discussing is when the death penalty for pederasty should be applied, and at which age a child is aware of sexuality. Nowhere does it say that such a grotesque act is permitted. The Sages are debating a sensitive issue of when a death penalty should be used. Shmuel insists that any child over the age of three is capable of accurately “throwing guilt” upon another, and this would be valid grounds for a death penalty. Elsewhere, the Talmud states that not only do pederasts deserve to be stoned to death, but they “delay the coming of the Messiah” (Niddah 13b).

The Talmud is similarly accused of allowing a three year old girl to be married. This is also not the whole picture. A father is allowed to arrange a marriage for his daughter, but “it is forbidden for one to marry off his daughter when she is small, until she grows up says ‘this is the one I want to marry.’” (Kiddushin 41a) Indeed, we don’t see a single case of any rabbi in the Talmud marrying a minor, or marrying off their underage daughter. Related discussions appear in a number of other pages of the Talmud. In one of these (Yevamot 60b), Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai states that a girl who was converted to Judaism before three years of age is permitted to marry a kohen, although kohanim are generally forbidden from marrying converts. This, too, has been twisted as if Rabbi Shimon allowed a kohen to marry a three-year old. He did not say this at all, rather stating that a girl under three who is converted to Judaism (presumably by her parents, considering her young age) is actually not considered a convert but likened to a Jew from birth. Once again we see the importance of proper context.

Science in the Talmud

Last week we already addressed that scientific and medical statements in the Talmud are not based on the Torah, and are simply a reflection of the contemporary knowledge of that time period. As we noted, just a few hundred years after the Talmud’s completion, Rav Sherira Gaon already stated that its medical advice should not be followed, nor should its (sometimes very strange) healing concoctions be made. The Rambam (Moreh Nevuchim III, 14) expanded this to include the sciences, particularly astronomy and mathematics, which had come a long way by the time of the Rambam (Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon, 1135-1204). The Rambam did not state that the Sages are necessarily wrong on scientific matters—for indeed we see that they are often quite precise—nonetheless:

You must not expect that everything our Sages say respecting astronomical matters should agree with observation, for mathematics were not fully developed in those days: and their statements were not based on the authority of the Prophets, but on the knowledge which they either themselves possessed or derived from contemporary men of science.

Some scientific statements of the Talmud which have been proven wrong include: The earth’s crust is 1000 cubits thick (Sukkot 53b)—today we have mines that go down four kilometres, which is well over 5000 cubits at least! Lions, bears, and elephants have a gestation period of three years (Bekhorot 8a)—while the Talmud is right by previously stating that cows have a nine-month gestation period, lions actually have gestation of 110 days, bears of 95-220 days depending on the species, and elephants of 22 months.

On the other hand, the Talmud is accurate, for example, when describing the water cycle (Ta’anit 9a), with Rabbi Eliezer explaining that water evaporates from the seas, condenses into clouds, and rains back down. It is also surprisingly close when calculating the number of stars in the universe (Berakhot 32b), with God declaring:

… twelve constellations have I created in the firmament, and for each constellation I have created thirty hosts, and for each host I have created thirty legions, and for each legion I have created thirty cohorts, and for each cohort I have created thirty maniples, and for each maniple I have created thirty camps, and to each camp I have attached three hundred and sixty-five thousands of myriads of stars, corresponding to the days of the solar year, and all of them I have created for your sake.

Doing the math brings one to 1018 stars. This number was hard to fathom in Talmudic times, and even more recently, too (I personally own a book published in the 1930s which states that scientists estimate there are about a million stars in the universe), yet today scientists calculate similar numbers, with one estimate at 1019 stars.

History in the Talmud

When it comes to historical facts the Talmud, like most ancient books, is not always accurate. Historical knowledge was extremely limited in those days. There was no archaeology, no linguistics, and no historical studies departments; neither were there printing presses or books to easily preserve or disseminate information. This was a time of fragile and expensive scrolls, typically reserved for Holy Scriptures.

All in all, the Talmud doesn’t speak too much of history. Some of its reckonings of kings and dynasties are certainly off, and this was recognized even before modern scholarship. For example, Abarbanel (1437-1508) writes of the Talmud’s commentaries on the chronology in Daniel that “the commentators spoke falsely because they did not know the history of the monarchies” (Ma’ayanei HaYeshua 11:4).

The Talmud has also been criticised for exaggerating historical events. In one place (Gittin 57b), for instance, the Talmud suggests that as many as four hundred thousand myriads (or forty billion) Jews were killed by the Romans in Beitar. This is obviously impossible, and there is no doubt the rabbis knew that. It is possible they did not use the word “myriads” to literally refer to 10,000 (as is usually accepted) but simply to mean “a great many”, just as the word is commonly used in English. If so, then the Talmud may have simply meant 400,000 Jews, which is certainly reasonable considering that Beitar was the last stronghold and refuge of the Jews during the Bar Kochva Revolt.

Archaeological remains of the Beitar fortress.

Either way, as already demonstrated the Talmud is known to use highly exaggerated language as a figure of speech. It is not be taken literally. This is all the more true for the stories of Rabbah Bar Bar Chanah, which are ridiculed for their embellishment. Bar Bar Chanah’s own contemporaries knew it, too, with Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish even refusing to take his helping hand while nearly drowning in the Jordan River! (Yoma 9b) Nonetheless, the Talmud preserves his tall tales probably because they carry deeper metaphorical meanings.

Having said that, there are times when the Talmud is extremely precise in its historical facts. For example, it records (Avodah Zarah 9a) the historical eras leading up to the destruction of the Second Temple:

…Greece ruled for one hundred and eighty years during the existence of the Temple, the Hasmonean rule lasted one hundred and three years during Temple times, the House of Herod ruled one hundred and three years. Henceforth, one should go on counting the years as from the destruction of the Temple. Thus we see that [Roman rule over the Temple] was two hundred and six years…

We know from historical sources that Alexander conquered Israel around 331 BCE. The Maccabees threw off the yoke of the Greeks around 160 BCE, and Simon Maccabee officially began the Hasmonean dynasty in 142 BCE. That comes out to between 171 and 189 years of Greek rule, depending on where one draws the endpoint, right in line with the Talmud’s 180 years. The Hasmoneans went on to rule until 37 BCE, when Herod took over—that’s 105 years, compared to the Talmud’s 103 years. And the Temple was destroyed in 70 CE, making Herodian rule over the Temple last about 107 years. We also know that Rome recognized the Hasmonean Jewish state around 139 BCE, taking a keen interest in the Holy Land thereafter, and continuing to be involved in its affairs until officially taking over in 63 BCE. They still permitted the Hasmoneans and Herodians to “rule” in their place until 92 CE. Altogether, the Romans loomed over Jerusalem’s Temple for about 209 years; the Talmud states 206 years. Considering that historians themselves are not completely sure of the exact years, the Talmud’s count is incredibly precise.

Understanding the Talmud

Lastly, it is important never to forget that the Talmud is not the code of Jewish law, and that Judaism is far, far more than just the Talmud. There are literally thousands of other holy texts. Jews do not just study Talmud, and even centuries ago, a Jew who focused solely on Talmud was sometimes disparagingly called a hamor d’matnitin, “Mishnaic donkey”. The Talmud itself states (Kiddushin 30a) that one should spend a third of their time studying Tanakh, a third studying Mishnah (and Jewish law), and a third studying Gemara (and additional commentary). The Arizal prescribes a study routine that begins with the weekly parasha from the Five Books of Moses, then progresses to the Nevi’im (Prophets) and Ketuvim, then to Talmud, and finally to Kabbalah (see Sha’ar HaMitzvot on Va’etchanan). He also states emphatically that one who does not study all aspects of Judaism has not properly fulfilled the mitzvah of Torah study.

A Torah scroll in its Sephardic-style protective case, with crown.

Those who claim that Jews have replaced the Tanakh with the Talmud are entirely mistaken: When Jews gather in the synagogue, we do not take out the Talmud from the Holy Ark, but a scroll of Torah. It is this Torah which is so carefully transcribed by hand, which is adorned with a crown to signify its unceasing authority, and before which every Jew rises. After the Torah reading, we further read the Haftarah, a selection from the Prophets. At no point is there a public reading of Talmud. As explained previously, the Talmud is there to help us understand the Tanakh, and bring it to life.

Ultimately, one has to remember that the Talmud is a continuing part of the evolution of Judaism. We wrote before how we were never meant to blindly follow the Torah literally, but rather to study it, develop it, grow together with it, and extract its deeper truths. The same is true of the Talmud—the “Oral” Torah—and of all others subjects within Judaism, including Midrash, Kabbalah, and Halacha. Judaism is constantly evolving and improving, and that’s the whole point.

For more debunking of lies and myths about the Talmud, click here.

The Real Messiah: Debunking Christianity and Islam

At the end of last week’s article, we cited the Tanakh and a number of midrashim that speak of a “new covenant” or “new Torah” in the time to come, which is supposed to be brought by Mashiach. These sources may be quite shocking to read, especially when they speak of the Torah we know and love essentially being annulled, and most of its laws no longer observed. For many, these ideas bring to mind Christianity and Islam, since the former believe in a “New Testament” that supplanted the “Old” one, while the latter see the Koran as a “Final Testament” that supplanted both the “New” and “Old”. As such, some have wondered: might Christians and Muslims actually have an argument?

No, they don’t.

Let’s start with Christianity: The first Christians were Jews who apparently followed a certain “rabbi” named Yehoshua, or Yeshu (or Jesus). We’ve already written in the past about the mythical origins of this Yehoshua, and how many details of his story were essentially plagiarized from the actual Biblical Yehoshua (Joshua). It isn’t too hard to imagine that the Jews who established Christianity were well-versed in the Tanakh, as well as various midrashic traditions. Of course, since they came to believe that Jesus was the messiah, they attributed to him what the Tanakh and other Jewish sources say about Mashiach, such as bringing a new covenant.

Yet, Jesus did not bring any new covenant at all. In fact, the New Testament itself records Jesus saying, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” (Matthew 5:17) Jesus goes on to state that anyone who fails to keep even the tiniest of Jewish laws, or fails to be even stricter than the Pharisees (ie. Rabbinic Jews) will be “least in the kingdom of heaven.”

Keep in mind that the New Testament was not put together until at least a century after Jesus’ passing. The earliest gospel (Mark) was only composed some fifty years later. None of the gospel writers knew Jesus personally. In short, the New Testament has little to do with the historical Jesus and cannot be the new covenant of Mashiach.

More significantly, Jesus accomplished absolutely nothing that Mashiach is supposed to accomplish. He did not fulfil the ingathering of all the Jewish exiles, did not re-establish a Jewish kingdom in Israel, and did not bring peace to the world. Ironically, more people have been slaughtered in the name of Jesus than in the name of anything else. Not exactly what the Torah has in mind when it speaks of a messiah.

Islam is even easier to dispense with. Muhammad had no evident relationship to the Holy Land of Israel, the Jewish people, the Davidic dynasty, or any part of the Torah for that matter. Some scholars have argued that Islam should not even be considered an “Abrahamic” religion. The Koran itself describes Muhammad as an ummi, an “illiterate”. Muslims have traditionally interpreted this to mean that he was not literally illiterate, rather that he had no knowledge of previous holy books, particularly the Torah.

As for the Koran, like the New Testament it was not put together until long after Muhammad’s death. But that matters little, since the Koran doesn’t even claim to have been brought by a messiah. Muslims do not consider Muhammad a messiah! So, who was the messiah according to Islam? The Koran says that Jesus was! Muslims accept Jesus as al-Masih (Mashiach). In fact, Jesus is mentioned more than anyone else in the Koran (including Muhammad), a whopping 187 times! And as we’ve already seen, Jesus was certainly not the prophesized messiah.

The Rambam tells us how we can recognize the true messiah: a wise, righteous, and charismatic Jewish leader who brings the entire nation back to Israel, re-establishes there a holy kingdom at peace with its neighbours, and rebuilds the Temple in Jerusalem. Mashiach is the one who fulfills these tasks. Such a person may be worthy of transmitting a new covenant from God. Anyone else is only a pretender; either a false messiah or a failed one.

Chag sameach!

Should Jews Celebrate New Year’s?

On December 31st, much of the world’s population stays up past midnight to commemorate the start of the new calendar year. This event is considered to be the most widely-celebrated public holiday in the world. Yet every year, many Jews wonder if they should be participating in these celebrations. Some answer with a quick no, since January 1st is associated with the circumcision of Jesus (as it is the 8th day following Christmas, December 25th). Others may say yes, since, among other reasons, we all use the Gregorian calendar, and January 1st is simply a secular holiday, having lost any past religious affiliations. As is often the case, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Back to the Roman Calendar

Roman Empire (Credit: Ancient History Encyclopedia)

Roman Empire (Credit: Ancient History Encyclopedia)

Today’s Gregorian calendar is based on the older Julian calendar, introduced by Julius Caesar. Historical records show that by the time of Julius Caesar, the Romans celebrated their new year on January 1st. In fact, “January” is named after the Roman god Janus, the deity of beginnings and ends, doors and gateways. Janus is always depicted as a double-headed god, with one head looking back into the past, and the other gazing into the future.

January 1st was also the start of the consular year in Rome, when the two highest-ranking elected officials, the consuls, took up their office for a single year term. From this information, we see that January 1st was already celebrated as a new year long before the time of Jesus.

Was Jesus Circumcised on the 1st of January?

Today, some Christian denominations still commemorate January 1st as the “Feast of the Circumcision”. The math is simple: if Christmas is the holiday of Jesus’ birth, then like all Jews he would have been circumcised on the eight day following his birth – January 1st. The question is: was Jesus actually born on the 25th of December?

Of course, many are aware of the fact that Jesus was certainly not born on the 25th of December. The New Testament does not mention the date of his birth at all, and suggests it was sometime in the summer, since it mentions people going to take a census (always done in the summer months), and that the shepherds were out watching their flocks (which they probably wouldn’t do in the cold winter nights of December). Early Christian leaders gave various dates to the birth of Jesus, ranging from March 28th to November 18th. Today, scholars believe it was likely the end of September.

Ironically, early Christian leaders actually mocked those who celebrated birthdays of any kind, especially that of Jesus, and considered it a pagan ritual. Alas, this is where Christmas actually comes from. Originally, December 25th was around the time of the pagan Roman holiday of Saturnalia. Later, it was also instituted as a holiday in honour of the birth of Sol Invictus, the solar deity. This comes from an ancient tradition to celebrate the “birth of the sun”, since the days start getting longer around this time of the year, hence the “solar rebirth”. To make Christianity more palatable to pagans, Christian leaders eventually switched “birth of the sun” to “birth of the Son”, ie. Jesus. And so, Jesus was not born on the 25th of December, and certainly wasn’t circumcised on the 1st of January.

(That is, of course, if Jesus had existed at all. More and more scholars are agreeing that Jesus probably never existed to begin with. Click here to read more about this.)

Celebrating the New Year on the 1st of January

Most European countries actually adopted January 1st as the start of a new year quite recently. The British Empire celebrated the New Year on March 25th until 1752! Similarly, many calendars continue to celebrate a new year sometime in the spring, including the Iranian, Assyrian, and several Indian calendars. Others have New Year’s days at other times, most famously the Chinese New Year in late January/early February. Nonetheless, most of these places, including China, also commemorate January 1st as the start of an international new year. Today, January 1st is definitely devoid of any real religious significance, and is perhaps the one truly global celebration. Having said that, it may still be tied to a historical bitterness for the Jewish people.

Sylvester’s Day

In several European countries, New Year’s Eve is called “Sylvester” or “St. Sylvester’s Day”. In Israel, too, December 31st is called “Sylvester”. This is the day of the passing of Pope Sylvester I, later canonized as a saint. Essentially nothing is known of this pope, though various legends arose over the centuries. Historical records suggest that it was during his reign that the Roman Emperor Constantine proclaimed the Edict of Milan which, among other things, stripped Jews of various rights and forbade them from living in Jerusalem.

Yet, Sylvester has nothing to do with New Year’s Eve itself; it is simply a coincidence of dates. Besides, many churches mark Sylvester’s Day on January 2nd, not December 31st. Either way, few people commemorate Sylvester’s Day at all, and most people have never even heard of it. (If Sylvester really was so bad for the Jews, maybe we should celebrate the day of his death!)

New Year’s in the Talmud

Amazingly, the Talmud (Avodah Zarah 8a) actually discusses New Year’s, calling it by its Roman name, Kalenda, or Kalends. The Mishnah here begins by listing it among the holidays of idol worshippers. However, it then goes on to explain that Kalenda originates in the Torah!

The Rabbis explain that following the consumption of the Forbidden Fruit, Adam soon noticed that the days were gradually getting shorter. (Since he was created on Rosh Hashanah – in the autumn – and consumed the Fruit that very same day.) Adam mistakenly thought that the days must be getting shorter because of his sin, and the world was descending into eternal darkness. He started to fast in repentance, and after eight days of fasting, the winter solstice came, and Adam noticed that the days were once again getting longer. In celebration, Adam established an eight-day feast (to balance out his eight-day fast). The following year, Adam commemorated both the winter solstice (around December 25th) and the day that marked the end of his eight-day feast (January 1st). The Talmudic sages conclude: “However, [Adam] established them for the sake of Heaven, but the [heathens] appropriated them for the sake of idolatry.”

So perhaps, if we have the sake of Heaven in mind, we may just be able to celebrate New Year’s after all.

Yehoshua and the Origins of Christianity

This week’s Torah portion is Pinchas, named after the grandson of Aaron, who stemmed the tide of immorality that followed the Moabite and Midianite ploy to bring Israel to sin. For his efforts, God blessed Pinchas with an everlasting blessing of peace. In the past, we explored the nature of this blessing, and how it resulted in Pinchas’ apparent immortality, as well as his eventual rebirth as Elijah the Prophet. This week, we will explore another critical figure in the Torah: Yehoshua, better known as Joshua.

Midway through this week’s parasha we read how God commanded Moses to officially appoint Yehoshua as Moses’ successor. Yehoshua is described as a person within whom rests the spirit of God. Although there are a number of Torah figures who are described as possessing some sort of Divine Spirit, Yehoshua is one of only two who are described as having the spirit within them. In most cases throughout the Bible, the spirit of God is said to rest upon an individual (‘alav in Hebrew), or to have temporarily filled an individual (mal’e or timal’e in Hebrew). With regards to Yehoshua, it says that the spirit was within him. The only other person in the Torah who is described in such a way is Yehoshua’s direct forefather Yosef (Genesis 41:38).

An even more peculiar detail about Yehoshua is that he is called “Yehoshua bin Nun”. Every other person in the Bible is referred to by their name, as well as by their father’s name, with the designation ben – “son of” – in the middle. Yehoshua alone is called bin Nun instead of the regular ben Nun. Moreover, a person named Nun cannot be found anywhere in the Torah, and unlike most other Torah figures, Yehoshua’s genealogy is not given (although one is provided in the Book of I Chronicles, written many centuries after the Torah). Other than the fact that Yehoshua stems from the tribe of Ephraim, nothing else of his origins is divulged.

Out of a Fish

A number of midrashim step in to fill some of the details about Yehoshua’s early life. There are a few versions of the story, with one particularly tragic variety that seems to be based on the Greek myth of Oedipus. All the versions agree that at birth, Yehoshua was left by his parents, possibly placed in the Nile River like Moses. Miraculously, a large fish swallowed him up, and Yehoshua was later saved by fishermen. In the Oedipus version, he is saved by the Pharaoh’s fisherman, and thus grows up in the palace, becoming the court executioner. He tragically ends up putting his own father to death, as was originally prophesized when Yehoshua was conceived (which is why his parents abandoned him to begin with).

I prefer to think of it more in the style of Moses, where Yehoshua was placed in the Nile just as Moses was, to avoid the Pharaoh’s decree of slaughtering all the male-born. By also growing up in the palace, alongside Moses, the two would have been well-acquainted, and that might explain why Yehoshua is so close to Moses throughout the Torah narrative.

His title of Bin Nun may come from the fact that he was taken out of a fish, since nun means “fish” in Aramaic. Thus, Nun is not the name of his father at all, explaining why he is not called Ben Nun. Rather, Bin Nun refers to his origins from the fish, with his true genealogy unknown.

Whatever the case, Yehoshua grows up to be a holy man, the personal servant of Moses, one of just two righteous spies, and the leader that finally brought the people into the Holy Land. The Sages describe him as the moon to Moses’ sun, and the key link in the chain of Jewish Oral Tradition.

The Origins of Christianity

'Joshua Commanding the Sun to Stand Still upon Gibeon' by John Martin

‘Joshua Commanding the Sun to Stand Still upon Gibeon’ by John Martin

When looking at the life story of Yehoshua, it is hard to miss the connection to Christianity. Like Yehoshua, Jesus is a Jew said to have had a miraculous birth, spent time growing up in Egypt, and was described as having the spirit of God within him. Like Yehoshua, Jesus is symbolized by a fish, and is seen as a sort-of successor to Moses (as suggested by his supposed “Transfiguration”, where he ascends to be blessed by Moses and Elijah). In the same way that Yehoshua stems from Joseph, Jesus’ earthly father is said to be Joseph. Jesus is described as a miracle-worker, just as Yehoshua facilitated a number of miracles, such as making the sun and moon stand still at Gibeon, and stopping the flow of the Jordan River. Of course, Jesus’ original name as pronounced in his day was Yeshu, the Aramaic version of Yehoshua.

The similarities don’t end there. Strangely, the Torah makes no mention of Yehoshua’s wife or children (even the genealogy given in I Chronicles ends with Yehoshua himself). Jesus, too, failed to marry or have kids. The Talmud (Megillah 14b) suggests that Yehoshua did later marry Rachav, the harlot that assisted the Israelites in the conquest of the Holy Land. Rachav had repented and become a righteous woman. Similarly, Jesus had close encounters with Mary Magdalene, also described as a harlot, and also rumoured to have possibly married Jesus!

It is important to remember that there is absolutely no evidence for the existence of Jesus outside of the New Testament. It is well-known that the New Testament was written long after Jesus would have lived, and is full of contradictions about the details of his life. Many have challenged the historicity of Jesus, with more and more scholars admitting that he likely did not exist at all.

Considering all that, it isn’t hard to imagine how early Christians would have put together the mythology of Jesus based on previous Torah ideas and narratives: a miraculously-born baby with the spirit of God, whose very name means “salvation”; celibate and childless, a humble, Godly servant bringing others to repentance, and leading the Israelites to the Promised Land… This is the story of the Torah’s Yehoshua, and the story that was adapted to fit the mold of a new religion a couple of millennia ago.

Ultimately, the Jewish Sages always saw Yehoshua as a prototype of Mashiach. After all, he is the one that defeated the embodiment of evil known as Amalek, and the one that ended the exile of the Jews, returning the people to their land. It isn’t surprising that Christians used Yehoshua as a prototype for their own supposed Messiah. Ironically, though, not only did Jesus fail to defeat evil, and fail to bring an end to the exile, he was also responsible for inspiring the murder of countless people thanks to all the holy wars, inquisitions, and crusades fought in his name. Jesus’ own message may have been peace, but his followers used him incessantly for war and bloodshed. Two millennia have passed, and the world is still far from perfect. We continue to await the arrival of the one true Messiah. May we all merit to see his coming soon.