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 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

So it goes on to say then, when it connects Psalm 110 and 2 Samuel 16:1 with Isaiah 53; Against God and His Messiah. If I find the son of the King, I shall lay hold of him and crucify him with a cruel death. The Talmud says the Messiah would be crucified with a cruel death. Litslov is exactly what it says, crucify. I will crucify him, lits’lo vohtoh. Jacob predicted again that the scepter would not depart Judah nor the ruler staff from between his feet until Shiloh comes Genesis 49:10. The Babylonian Talmud states that when this occurred the sages said again, woe to us for the scepter has been taken from Judah, and the Messiah has not appeared. Rabbi Ruchman adds that the Sanhedrin members covered their heads with ashes, their bodies with sack cloth, and cried when they heard these words, and the Jerusalem Talmud dates this occasion as a little more than 40 years before the destruction of the temple, that was in 70 AD. So that they are saying that from around 30 AD the Messiah was pierced. The Jerusalem Talmud, Sanhedrin Vol 24 and the Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin Vol 37, chapter 4.

I cannot even remember what my lead was any more. Sorry. I guess it didn’t pan out into anything.

So I’m guessing you didn’t find it?

I’m still working on it… I have a possible lead…

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.

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!