How is that for a blog post title?
Ok, students, I have an assignment for you.
In Josh McDowell’s book, Evidence that Demands a Verdict, he references a quote from the Jewish Babylonian Talmud which supposedly says, “Woe unto us, for the scepter has departed from Judah, and the Messiah has not come!” (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 4,37A). The Rabbi who wrote this was speaking in reference to the prophecy in Genesis 49:10 that the scepter will not depart from Judah until Shiloh comes.
I looked it up, and as far as I can tell, no such quote exists on that page of the Talmud.
So either somebody “invented” this quote because it makes a cool point in a sermon, OR the reference in wrong.
I called a “Jews for Jesus” friend of mine to see if he uses this quote in his evangelistic efforts, and he said, “All the time. It is very effective.” I asked him if he knew if the quote was authentic or not, and he assured me it was, even though he didn’t know where it could be found.
Then Iย aksed myย new Jewish friends to help me find it, but they say the quote doesn’t exist. They suspect that some Christian invented (aka “forged”) the quote in an attempt to get Jews to become Christians. If true, somebody better tell all the pastors and authors who use this quote in their teachings (e.g. Chuck Missler, me, and others).
Finally,ย I tried to do some research online to find it, and discovered that lots of people have the same question, but nobody has yet found the quote. I tried to check some Jewish websites, and in the process, found out thatย many Jewish websites “rest” on the Sabbath (e.g. www.artscroll.comย – try to access this site on Saturday before sundown). Very interesting.
So, I decided to ask you! Let me know what you discover…if anything.
I know that probably nobody cares about this but me…
But here is some more information.
I talked with a Jewish Rabbi today who loves to do “Bible studies” with non-Jews. He told me that it is quite possible that the quote was originally in the Talmud. He said that back in the Middle Ages, some Rabbis went through the Talmud and edited out any references to Jesus as well as anything that Christians liked to use to evangelize Jews. Since this quote would be one which would fit that category, IF it was there, it is probably not there any longer.
Apparently, they are working on putting out a new (old) edition of the Talmud which contains all those quotes which were originally there, but edited out 500 years ago.
Another Jewish man said that there is a book which contains only those things that were edited out, but he couldn’t remember the name of the book.
So, I’ve got another trail to sniff out…
Jeremy,
I know this is old, but it is a VERY interesting thread/blog post.
You wrote:
back in the Middle Ages, some Rabbis went through the Talmud and edited out any references to Jesus as well as anything that Christians liked to use to evangelize Jews. Since this quote would be one which would fit that category, IF it was there, it is probably not there any longer.
Apparently, they are working on putting out a new (old) edition of the Talmud which contains all those quotes which were originally there, but edited out 500 years ago.
unquote.
I’ve heard something to this effect too, but not just the Talmud, but that that what we have in the Masoretic Text, was ‘too messianic’ and that got change, and that the ’70’ or septuagint, is much closer to the originals than the Hebrew Text. Did you find out anything about this?
GREAT blogpost topic.
Great article and keep being an approved workman! Just because everyone is saying it, including me in the past, it has to be proven. You have gone the extra mile. It would be great to find that book of lost/edited quotes!
Blessings!
Jeremy, mystery solved!
This quotation is found in the Pugio Fidei on page 872 (Voisin/Carpzov edition 1687, reprinted 1967 by Gregg, Farnham, UK. The Latin translates accurately the Hebrew text, attributing it to “R. Rachmon” – Rabbi Rachmon.
According to my source, this is not in the Talmud as we have it, either Jerusalem or Babylonian, and there has always been a controversy over whether the author of the Pugio Fidei (“Dagger of Faith”) invented it, or far more likely and now the majority view of most scholars, had access to rabbinic materials that are now no longer available, or have been suppressed, possibly by Jewish or Christian editors, or have simply disappeared. Syds Wiersma, whose recent PhD on the PF is blogged about here – https://jewinthepew.org/2015/05/20/20-may-2015-first-pugio-fidei-doctoral-dissertation-defended-otdimj/
Until more research is done, the more likely explanation is that Raymond Martin, the author of the PF, is accurately quoting from rabbinic materials which at present we do not have in other forms, particularly his quotations from Rabbi Rachmon and another medieval figure, Mosheh Hadarshan – Moses the Preacher.
See also 10 Quotations, Translations, and Uses of Jewish Texts in Ramon Martรญโs Pugio fidei In: The Late Medieval Hebrew Book in the Western Mediterranean Author: Philippe Bobichon Type: Chapter Pages: 266โ293 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004306103_012
My source also says it is worth noting that Gen. 49:10, the prophecy about the sceptre not departing “ad ki yavo shelo/shilo” – until he comes to whom it belongs/until he comes to Shiloh” was one of the most discussed prophecies in the middle ages, even though it is not discussed much today.
Hope this is helpful for you!
What? An ancient and holy book of prophecy may have been changed to better control the target demographic and further the agenda of those who controlled access to the information?
InconCEIVable!
I emailed Josh McDowell about the quote in his book, and here is the response I received back from one of his research staff:
“This quotation in *New Evidence that Demands a Verdict *is not correct. The quotation does not appear in the Babylonian Talmud at all, nor does it appear in other versions of the Talmud. I had a librarian at Talbot School of Theology research this for several months, and it appears to be a mistaken quotation that dates back several hundred years to a Latin commentary on the Talmud. Josh used a secondary source for his quotation, apparently a book called *Jesus Before the Sanhedrin, *a book by a Frenchman named M.M. Lemann. The English translation by Julius Magath was published in 1886. Lemann uses this quotation, and cites a Latin commentary by Raymond Martin called *Pugio fidei, *p 872. I have left this Latin quotation with a professor who knows both Hebrew and Latin to get the literal translation, but have not heard back from him.
“We deeply regret that this information in the *New Evidence *is not correct.
We apologize for the inconvenience to you. It will be corrected in future editions of *Evidence that Demands a Verdict.*”
Ah well, just a mistake. I’m sorry, Jeremy. This could have been your Da Vinci Code!
๐
Thanks for the research Jeremy…..it is not only you that are interested in this!
I would love to know why people use so many ‘quotes’ from Talmud to state their case, and when I look up the reference in Talmud it either is not there or words have been added to suite their aim or the quote has been taken out of context (and actually says the opposite if quoted in context!)
I am actually starting to get sick of this, seems like ‘christians’ can be as big a ‘hypocrite’ as the ones (i.e. pharisees) they claim are hypocrites!
Beyers, I think your use of the word ‘hypocrite’ is wrongly applied. What I think is that many ‘chrisitians’ [sic] are so zealous for their faith they swallow anything that appears to bolster it that sounds scholarly. I also think that many are unable or unwilling to check the sources they cite.
I’ve read and reread the page in McDowell’s book and he clearly cites the Talmudic passage as a secondary source which is scholastically sound. What is NOT scholastically sound for a book like ‘Evidence that Demands a Verdict’ is their not checking secondary sources – especially when the validity of the citations are critical to the argument being made. It’s that “zealousness” thing AND it’s sloppy scholastics.
You do have to credit McDowell’s staff for owning up to the mistake. Willingness to own up to publicly acknowledge one’s mistakes is the mark of humility which is the opposite of hypocrisy.
Wow! What an eye opener. What I thought was going to be a 10 minute homework project turned into an entire evening of work. I was writing a response to a paper on common Messianic titles used during the intertestamental period. I thought I had a slam dunk answer by throwing in Shiloh as a Messianic title and citing the story in the Talmud. I am so glad I spent the last three hours researching this thing. I am amazed at how many people cite this story from the Talmud without even verifying it. It is kind of embarrassing to see what scholarly Jews say about it as well. I can’t speak for other Christians, but I know that I have learned a valuable lesson about just repeating things you hear – even from respected preachers and teachers.
Jimmy,
So I’m guessing you didn’t find it?
I’m still working on it… I have a possible lead…
I was recently trying to hunt the same thing down, with no success. But I did wind up here, which has been useful! Any luck with following that lead?
John,
I cannot even remember what my lead was any more. Sorry. I guess it didn’t pan out into anything.
Hi Jeremy,
I happened upon your post – I know it’s a bit old, but located a possible answer for your question about the Jews at the time of Coponius and the fulfillment of Genesis 49:10 – hopefully this will help:
From Let Us Reason
Luci,
Hmmm. That might help. I don’t think I have checked the Jerusalem Talmud yet. However, I did check the Babylonian Talmud, and this quote is not on that page.
Also, you have given me name of a Rabbi to research… Rabbi Ruchman. That is a lead to follow. Thanks for posting this! If I find anything further, I will update it here.
I will ask some of my Jewish coworkers about it also. Perhaps their Rabbis will have some input.
If this quote is indeed false, it nevertheless bags the question:
Since The Romans had (as they always did, eventually) taken the ultimate legal Authority from the Jewish Rabbis in Israel (the Sceptre) and the Messiah had not come (as the Rabbi’s still claim, then surely Abraham (the Father Of faith) is a false prophet? and his name should be blotted out (something No Rabbis would do, but they do to Jesus’s name)
I don’t know… I wish I could get someone to find the true origins of this quote for me… I have asked everyone I know.
You would have to track down the uncensored Babylonian Talmud. It is known that many quotes that referred to Jesus or gave support to Him being the Messiah were taken out.
Hi Jeremy,
Thanks for the post;
Am teaching on ancient prophecy concerning Christ, and am aware of the quote concerning Shilo and the Talmud. Thought to check the source and am finding it difficult as the Babylonian Talmud copy I have does not seperate immediately to chapters as it contains 20 volumes which themselves seperate into Chapters.
Nevertheless and for what its worth, having a digital copy I did a search and found a reference to Shiloh and Genesis 49 in Volume 19, chapter 8 under “Religious Disputes of All Periods”.
But this passage was written well after the time of Christ as it sites a dispute in 1263 where Pablo Christiani defends Christianity using that passage and stating that seeing the Temple was destroyed it was clear the “Sceptre” had indeed departed from Judah, Therefore Shiloh is come.
Sadly however there must be an Origin to the quote used by Missler / McDowell et al, my main disappointment is that while McDowel honestly notes his use was based on a secondary source, Missler does not.
We must be beyond reproach of we are to site so important a passage. I certainly cannot use this quotation in my own lecture for just that reason; C. Missler however has an internationally influential ministry and should be more careful when making such a claim.
His citing of Augustin Lemann 1886 is far too late for a Christ contemporary quote.
Nevertheless, appreciate your work and certainly would like to see it appear.
All the best with it.
Regards, Edi.
You’re right, Jeremy, nobody cares about this but you. Until they DO ๐
I’m having to find this for someone and I hate to tell them that nobody can locate it. We all need trace something all the way to the end, I suppose.
This has been stumping me and I’m so glad that you are looking into this. Will you please publish when you find out more?
What Sanhedrin 4, 37b says is, “From the day that the Temple was destroyed, although the Sanhedrin ceased to be extant, the four types of court-imposed capital punishment have not ceased. The Gemara asks: Have they really not ceased? But they have ceased, as court-imposed capital punishment is no longer given. Rather, the intention is that the ‘halakha’ of the four types of court-imposed capital punishment has not ceased to be applicable. (Davidson, from Sefaria)”
I have no idea where McDowell got that, and it is irresponsible of everyone to keep that zombie quote going. But the fact remains, the scepter did depart from Judah in 7 CE, after Archelaus was deposed, and when Yeshua of Nazareth was 10. The quote is bogus, but the facts are well-known.
Hi, were you finally able to find anything about that quote?
I really appreciate you looking into that, I’ve been doing some digging but so far I haven’t found anything serious about the existence of the quote. I would appreciate it, if you discover something and share it with us
If you are thinking that the destruction of the temple proves that Jesus is the Messiah, then please explain to me what was the issue with the first destruction of the holy temple hundreds of years prior to his birth? The destruction you are referring to was the second time!! If the rabbis wept, they should have wept earlier, which they probably did, but that is not the point. The scepter always stayed with the jewish people, and the following is Rashis commentary on that:
THE SCEPTRE SHALL NOT DEPART FROM JUDAH โ Even after the house of David ceases to reign. For this refers to the Chiefs of the Exile in Babylon who ruled over the people with the rod (ืฉืื) having been appointed by the government (Sanhedrin 5a; Horayot 11b).
AND THE LAWGIVER FROM BETWEEN HIS FEET โ This refers to the scholars of the Torah: the Princes of the Land of Israel (as Hillel and his descendants who were Heads of Schools only and had no political power) (Sanhedrin 5a; Horayot 11b).
Please have in mind that one of the tasks the coming Messiah is to fulfill, is teaching Torah.