Thanks for your response and for your clarification. I suppose that I read too much into the term “representative.”

Besides “Jesus and the Talmud,” I have only read “History of the Jews in the Greco-Roman World: The Jews of Palestine from Alexander the Great to the Arab Conquest” by Schäfer. I find it very interesting to read his work because most of what I have read is from a Christian perspective.

Thanks for your comment. I completely agree with you. Perhaps my use of the word “representative” was confusing. I meant “representative” in the broadest sense, which I think can include the idea of parody. By criticizing Eliezer, the rabbis were in reality criticizing Jesus.

Thank you for your feedback. I appreciate the sharpening. By the way, have you read much of Schäfer’s work. If so, what did you think of it?

In Christ,
NB

In regard to footnote #9, it is clear from Schäfer’s work that his point was not that the stories about Rebbe Eliezer in the Talmud were “representative” of Christ, but were, rather, a parody of Christ. It was a way in which the Rabbis of the time took “pot shots” at the beliefs of Christianity. The fact that later Rabbis rejected the stories about Eliezer was also another way to take a “pot shot” at Christianity. It was, in effect, saying, “The Christians might believe these things about their “Messiah,” but we know enough to reject them as fantastic fables.”

Reasons We Believe (click here).