A Rare, and Hidden, Talmudic Response to Christian Teachings

Jan. 12 2024

In many passages, the New Testament excoriates the Pharisees (a Second Temple-era Jewish sect) as “hypocrites,” a charge that numerous later Christian authors leveled against Jews, and that early Protestants like Martin Luther leveled against the Catholic Church. Shlomo Zuckier suggests that a talmudic anecdote in Tractate Sotah is intended as rebuttal against the accusation:

While the rabbis do not often betray a direct knowledge of Christian sources, and do not utilize the Greek word hypokritai, [this] talmudic passage seems to represent a rabbinic response to this New Testament trope; . . . it describes certain impious dissemblers as ts’vu’in, literally “colored” one of the terms that roughly stands in for the term “hypocrite.”

[The term] points to someone who in truth is a sinner, but who represents himself as a saint, and moreover seeks reward for his purported good deeds. The inconsistency between integral behavior and public comportment, the “painting over” of a sullied soul, as well as the focus on public recognition and honor, fit the Gospel writers’ description of the Pharisaic hypocrites.

This teaching in some ways validates the . . . Gospels’ critique, arguing that there are those who present themselves as righteous Pharisees but in truth are sinners. At the same time, however, this teaching asserts that those performative Jews are no true Pharisees, but are actually ts’vu’in, hypocrites dressing themselves up as righteous and hijacking the Pharisees’ deserved good reputation.

Read more at Coproduced Religions

More about: New Testament, Pharisees, Talmud

After Taking Steps toward Reconciliation, Turkey Has Again Turned on Israel

“The Israeli government, blinded by Zionist delusions, seizes not only the UN Security Council but all structures whose mission is to protect peace, human rights, freedom of the press, and democracy,” declared the Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan in a speech on Wednesday. Such over-the-top anti-Israel rhetoric has become par for the course from the Turkish head of state since Hamas’s attack on Israel last year, after which relations between Jerusalem and Ankara have been in what Hay Eytan Cohen Yanarocak describes as “free fall.”

While Erdogan has always treated Israel with a measure of hostility, the past few years had seen steps to reconciliation. Yanarocak explains this sharp change of direction, which is about much more than the situation in Gaza:

The losses at the March 31, 2024 Turkish municipal elections were an unbearable blow for Erdoğan. . . . In retrospect it appears that Erdoğan’s previous willingness to continue trade relations with Israel pushed some of his once-loyal supporters toward other Islamist political parties, such as the New Welfare Party. To counter this trend, Erdoğan halted trade relations, aiming to neutralize one of the key political tools available to his Islamist rivals.

Unsurprisingly, this decision had a negative impact on Turkish [companies] engaged in trade with Israel. To maintain their long-standing trade relationships, these companies found alternative ways to conduct business through intermediary Mediterranean ports.

The government in Ankara also appears to be concerned about the changing balance of power in the region. The weakening of Iran and Hizballah could create an unfavorable situation for the Assad regime in Syria, [empowering Turkish separatists there]. While Ankara is not fond of the mullahs, its core concern remains Iran’s territorial integrity. From Turkey’s perspective, the disintegration of Iran could set a dangerous precedent for secessionists within its own borders.

Read more at Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security

More about: Iran, Israel diplomacy, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkey