1413 Disputation In Tortosa
In medieval Europe, three disputations between rabbis and Christian clerics were held in response to the negative or deteriorating opinion of Judaism that prominent Christians held. The first of these disputations was held in Paris of 1240 when the Pope, Gregory IX, became convinced that The Talmud held obscenities, as well as anti-Christian content; consequently, the disputation was introduced. The 1413 disputation in Tortosa was held in an equally strained atmosphere because of the persecution of Jews that had taken place a few years prior to the disputation, and anti-Jewish laws that were being established. While the setting of the 1263 Barcelona disputation was the least volatile of the three disputations, opinions of Judaism and its followers
…show more content…
For example, in the defense of the charge of “foolish and obscene passages” (Judaism on Trial 36), Rabbi Yehiel told his Christian opponents that the Aggadic parts of the Talmud were not authoritative, and. For example, according to The Vikuah of R. Yehiel of Paris: A Paraphrase, Donin recited several passages in the Talmud which mentioned the name “Jesus” and argued that they were blasphemous toward Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Rabbi Yehiel continuously emphasized that the passages were not meant to represent Jesus Christ, rather they were men who happened to be named Jesus, but were distinctly different from each other and Jesus Christ (The Paris Disputation, 1240 29). While some of the passages may have been written in referral to Jesus Christ, Rabbi Yehiel provided solid evidence explaining why other passages could not have been written about Jesus Christ. Regardless, Donin did not respond to any of the defenses that Yehiel had. For example, in The Vikuah of R. Yehiel of Paris page 156, after Rabbi Yehiel explained why the “Jesus” who is portrayed as being in hell is a different Jesus than Christ, Donin did not respond to the evidence that Yehield provided and
For example, in the defense of the charge of “foolish and obscene passages” (Judaism on Trial 36), Rabbi Yehiel told his Christian opponents that the Aggadic parts of the Talmud were not authoritative, and. For example, according to The Vikuah of R. Yehiel of Paris: A Paraphrase, Donin recited several passages in the Talmud which mentioned the name “Jesus” and argued that they were blasphemous toward Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Rabbi Yehiel continuously emphasized that the passages were not meant to represent Jesus Christ, rather they were men who happened to be named Jesus, but were distinctly different from each other and Jesus Christ (The Paris Disputation, 1240 29). While some of the passages may have been written in referral to Jesus Christ, Rabbi Yehiel provided solid evidence explaining why other passages could not have been written about Jesus Christ. Regardless, Donin did not respond to any of the defenses that Yehiel had. For example, in The Vikuah of R. Yehiel of Paris page 156, after Rabbi Yehiel explained why the “Jesus” who is portrayed as being in hell is a different Jesus than Christ, Donin did not respond to the evidence that Yehield provided and