Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Is Pope Benedict Guilty of a “perverse resurrection of Talmudic Judaism”?

…or is the Holy Father simply following the lead of St. Paul and Jesus?

In March, 2007, Bob Sungenis attacked Jewish convert, Roy Schoeman, for daring to use the Talmud in his book Salvation is from the Jews. For the sake of evangelizing fellow Jews, Schoeman had cited passages from the Talmud that clearly support the belief that Jesus was the Messiah of Israel.

Bob writes:

“Schoeman claims that we can look ‘to the Talmud to examine some of what it has to say about the Messiah’ (p. 111)…Schoeman’s appeal is nothing more than a perverse resurrection of Talmudic Judaism.” (Thirteen Problems with the Theology and Eschatology of Roy Schoeman, p. 2)


Then, later that same month, Bob further attacked Schoeman and Ben Douglass for defending Schoeman:

“The Talmud’s concept of a Messiah has nothing whatsoever to do with Christ, even by extraction. It doesn’t matter how close Schoeman makes the descriptions in the Talmud match Jesus Christ… Unfortunately, the young and impressionable Mr. Douglass is being sucked into all this erroneous thinking by his devotion to Mr. Schoeman.” (Catholics Falling for Jewish Errors, pp 49-50)

“Mr. Schoeman strains to show some positive prophecies because it is his express purpose to exonerate the Talmud as a Christian-accepted book when in fact it is a book of Christ-hating and Christianity-loathing Jewish scholars who hoped to see the Catholic Church destroyed. Unfortunately, Mr. Douglass, probably because of his pride in seeking to denigrate me, has allowed himself to fall for this bit of spiritual chicanery.” (Ibid, pp 49-50)


Incredibly, Bob is now defending Pope Benedict’s use of the Talmud, using arguments that almost precisely mirror those that Ben Douglass used to defend Roy Schoeman against Bob’s attacks:

“The pope is no more to be condemned for quoting the Talmud than St. Paul is for quoting a pagan Greek poet in Acts 17:28 to make his theological point to the Athenians gathered on Mars Hill…In no way can it be concluded that Paul was ‘rehabilitating an eternally condemned, anti-Christian text.’ Rather, he did what any good apologist would do -- use his opponents own arguments against himself. If it takes quoting from the opponent's true statements in his own literature, Paul will do so, for, as he says in 1 Cor 9, he becomes all things to all peoples so that he may win them to the Gospel.”

“Hence, when Pope Benedict said: ‘Does not the Talmud Yoma (85b) state: 'The Sabbath has been given to you, but you have not been given to the Sabbath?,’ he was using the same apologetic methodology as St. Paul. In fact, Pope Benedict is using the same apologetic that Jesus himself used when confronting the Pharisees. It is a classic case of using your opponent's strengths to defeat him. Granted, Jesus is not using the Talmud here, but the quote the pope cited from the Talmud is so close to what Jesus said of the Sabbath, that they are virtually the same.”

“Hence, the pope was quite correct in using the Talmud in his discussion with the Jews in France…If, in some sections of the Talmud, it can be shown that the statements therein agree with godly principles and Christian truth, it is certainly appropriate to quote them to the people who believe they are authoritative, for you show them that even their own authority agrees with you.”

“The Talmud itself, is an anti-Christian book…Christians have no basis elevating the Talmud as a divine book or even something authoritative. It is a Jewish book written for Jewish people and, in fact, in several places it repudiates Christ and Christianity. But this makes the quoting from the Talmud by the pope all the more note worthy, for if the Jews regard it as having any authority, then they must conclude that what the pope is saying about the Sabbath and its relation to Christianity must be true, for even the Talmud recognizes that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Once the Jews see this truth, then they might be able to appreciate all the other truths Christianity has to offer.”

(Pope Benedict’s Citing of the Talmud, pp 2-4)

(Ben Douglass' defenses of Roy Schoeman may be viewed here and here.)


Additionally, Douglass noted the following regarding Bob's unfair treatment of Schoeman:

Interestingly enough, Sungenis goes on to admit that Schoeman highlights some of the Talmud's blasphemies on pp. 132-134 of Salvation is from the Jews. Sungenis will later complain that, "There is hardly a negative word about the Talmud in Schoeman's book. Not once does he cite the very controversial passages in which the Talmud condemns Jesus Christ, Mary and Christianity." Yes he does, on pages 132-134. You already admitted it. (Article)

So, there you have it. If Jewish convert Roy Schoeman uses the Talmud to convince Jews of a Catholic truth, he is damned for a “perverse resurrection of Talmudic Judaism.” And Ben Douglass has been “sucked into all this erroneous thinking” and has “allowed himself to fall for…spiritual chicanery” by defending Schoeman’s perversion. But if Pope Benedict XVI does the same thing that Schoeman did, the Pope is merely doing something that St. Paul and even Jesus himself did.  And it is a “classic” and “completely appropriate” approach to evangelism.

Certainly, we are thankful that Bob has not launched another unjust attack on the Holy Father in this instance (although Bob has recently unjustly attacked the Holy Father in regard to another issue involving Jews - click here). But we wish that Bob could avoid the double standards that so often mar his work, especially when Jews are involved (see here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).

We hope, therefore, that he will retract and apologize for his unjust attacks on Schoeman and Douglass, in light of his defense of Pope Benedict’s use of the Talmud. And we continue to hope that he will also publicly retract and apologize for the fraudulent quote he knows that he falsely attributed to Schoeman over a year and a half ago (see here.)