There are several passages in the Talmud which are believed by some scholars to be references to Jesus. The name used in the Talmud is "Yeshu" (), the Aramaic vocalization (although not spelling) of the Hebrew name Yeshua. Many such passages have been deemed blasphemous by historical Christian authorities, including the Catholic Church.

Most Talmudic stories featuring an individual named "Yeshu" are framed in time periods which do not synchronize with one another, nor do they align with the scholarly consensus of Jesus' lifetime, with chronological discrepancies sometimes amounting to as much as a century before or after the accepted dates of Jesus' birth and death.L. Patterson, "Origin of the Name Panthera", JTS 19 (1917–18), p. 79–80, cited in Meier, p. 107 n. 48 This apparent multiplicity of "Yeshu"'s within the text has been used to defend the Talmud against Christian accusations of blaspheming Jesus since at least the 13th century.

In the modern era, there has been a variance of views among scholars on the possible references to Jesus in the Talmud, depending partly on presuppositions as to the extent to which the ancient rabbis were preoccupied with Jesus and Christianity.Delbert Burkett (2010). The Blackwell Companion to Jesus. p. 220. "That is to say, varying presuppositions as to the extent to which the ancient rabbis were preoccupied with Jesus and Christianity can easily predetermine which texts might be identified and interpreted as having him in mind." This range of views among modern scholars on the subject has been described as a range from "minimalists" who see few passages with reference to Jesus, to "maximalists" who see many passages having reference to Jesus.The Blackwell Companion to Jesus, ed. Burkett p. 220 2010 "Accordingly, scholars' analyses range widely from minimalists (e.g., Lauterbach 1951) – who recognize only relatively few passages that actually have Jesus in mind – to moderates (e.g., Herford 2006), to maximalists (Klausner 1943 ... especially Schäfer)" These terms "minimalist" and "maximalist" are not unique to discussion of the Talmud text; they are also used in discussion of academic debate on other aspects of Jewish vs. Christian and Christian vs. Jewish contact and polemic in the early centuries of Christianity, such as the Adversus Iudaeos genre.Maurice Wiles, Edward Yarnold, P. M. Parvis (1997). Papers presented at the Thirteenth International Conference on Patristic Studies. p. 398 "These scholars represent a school of thought, which can be described as minimalist, as it argues that there was minimal ... including Horbury, who accepts some aspects of the minimalist argument and does not dismiss Harnack outright." "Minimalists" include Jacob Zallel Lauterbach (1951) ("who recognize[d] only relatively few passages that actually have Jesus in mind"), while "maximalists" include R. Travers Herford (1903) (who concluded that most of the references related to Jesus, but were non-historical oral traditions which circulated among Jews),James Carleton Paget (2010). Jews, Christians and Jewish Christians in Antiquity. p. 279. "44 Herford 1903, 63. 45 Even Herford, who takes a maximalist view of this material, agrees with this conclusion. "If the summary of the Jesus-Tradition, given above be examined, it will be found to contain little, if anything".Lasker, p. xxi, summarizes Herford's conclusions; R. Travers Herford (1903), Christianity in Talmud and Midrash, London: Williams & Norgate (reprint New York, KTAV, 1975) and Peter Schäfer (2007) (who concluded that the passages were parodies of parallel stories about Jesus in the New Testament incorporated into the Talmud in the 3rd and 4th centuries that illustrate the inter-sect rivalry between Judaism and nascent Christianity).Peter Schäfer, Jesus in the Talmud, Princeton University Press, 2007, pp. 6-7, 9, 21, 93-94 and more.

The first Christian censorship of the Talmud occurred in the year 521.Reverend James Parkes, The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue, p. 392 More extensive censorship began during the Middle Ages, notably under the directive of Pope Gregory IX. Catholic authorities accused the Talmud of blasphemous references to Jesus and Mary. Jewish scholars refuted these claims, stating that there were no references to Jesus in the Talmud and that names like Joshua were common and unrelated to Jesus. These disputations led to the removal of many passages from subsequent editions of the Talmud.

Some editions of the Talmud, particularly those from the 13th century onward, are missing these references, removed either by Christian censors,William L. Merrifield (2010), Who Do You Say I Am?: Jesus Called the Christ, Tate Publishing. p. 39. by Jews themselves out of fear of reprisals, or possibly lost through negligence or accident. However, most editions of the Talmud published since the early 20th century have seen the restoration of most of these references.

History

During the Middle Ages a series of debates on Judaism were staged by the Catholic Church—including the Disputation of Paris, the Disputation of Barcelona, and Disputation of Tortosa—and during those disputations, Jewish converts to Christianity, such as Pablo Christiani and Nicholas Donin claimed the Talmud contained insulting references to Jesus.Maccoby, Hyam, Judaism on Trial An early work describing Jesus in the Talmud was Pugio Fidei ("Dagger of Faith") (c. 1280) by the Catalan Dominican Ramón Martí, a Jewish convert to Christianity.Schäfer, p. 3. In 1681 Johann Christoph Wagenseil translated and published a collection of anti-Christian polemics from Jewish sources, with the title Tela Ignea Satanæ, sive Arcani et Horribiles Judæorum Adversus Christum, Deum, et Christianam Religionem Libri (Flaming Arrows of Satan, that is, the secret and horrible books of the Jews against Christ, God, and the Christian religion) which discussed Jesus in the Talmud. The first book devoted solely to the topic of Jesus in the Talmud was the Latin work Jesus in Talmude published in 1699 by Rudolf Martin Meelführer, a student of Wagenseil at Altdorf.Schäfer, p. 4. In 1700, Johann Andreas Eisenmenger published Entdecktes Judenthum (Judaism Unmasked), which included descriptions of Jesus in the Talmud, and which would become the basis of much anti-Semitic literature in later centuries such as The Talmud Unmasked written in 1892 by Justinas Bonaventure Pranaitis.Rodkinson, pp 104–105

Starting in the 20th century the topic of Jesus in Judaic literature became subject to more unbiased, scholarly research, such as Das Leben Jesu nach jüdischen Quellen (The Life of Jesus From Jewish Sources) written in 1902 by Samuel Krauss, which was the first scholarly analysis of the Judaic anti-Christian polemic Toledot Yeshu (The Biography of Jesus). In 1903, Unitarian scholar R. Travers Herford wrote Christianity in Talmud and Midrash, which became the standard work on the topic in the Christian world. He concluded that a large number of references referred to Jesus, not as a historical individual, but instead as the messiah of Christianity.Schäfer, p. 4.; Lasker p. xxi: Lasker writes that Herford "argues that the Talmudic Yeshus do indeed, refer to Jesus of Nazareth, but the citations concerning him reflect non-historical oral traditions which circulated among Jews and are not based on the written Gospels or other more authentic records of the life of Jesus. One can learn nothing about the historical Jesus from rabbinic accounts; at most one can learn form them something about rabbinic attitudes towards Jesus. In sum, the Talmud does make reference to the Christian Jesus but has nothing to offer the searcher for the historical Jesus. Such a position [says Lasker about Herford] seems eminently reasonable ..." In 1910, Hermann Strack wrote Jesus, die Häretiker und die Christen nach den ältesten jüdischen Angaben (Jesus, the heretics and the Christians according to the oldest Jewish data), which found no evidence of a historical Jesus in the Talmud. In 1922 Joseph Klausner wrote Yeshu ha-Notzri (Jesus of Nazareth) which concluded that "the evidence [for a historical Jesus] in the Talmud is scanty and does not contribute much to our knowledge of the historical Jesus; much of it is legendary and reflects the Jewish attempt to counter Christian claims and reproaches" but he did conclude some material was historically reliable.Schäfer, p. 5; Theissen, p. 75. In 1950 Morris Goldstein wrote Jesus in the Jewish Tradition, including sections on the Toledoth Yeshu. In 1951, Jacob Z. Lauterbach wrote the essay Jesus in the Talmud.Schäfer, p. 5. In 1978 Johann Maier wrote Jesus von Nazareth in der talmudischen Überlieferung (Jesus of Nazareth in the Talmudic tradition) in which he concludes that there is virtually no evidence of the historical Jesus in the Talmud and that the references to Jesus were "legendary" and probably added late in the Talmudic era "as a reaction to Christian provocations".Theissen, pp. 74–75; Schäfer, p. 5. In 2007, Peter Schäfer wrote Jesus in the Talmud in which he tried to find a middle ground between "anti-Jewish Christian" and "apologetic Jewish" interpretations. He concluded that the references to Jesus (as the messiah of Christianity) were included in the early (3rd and 4th century) versions of the Talmud and were parodies of New Testament narratives.Peter Schäfer, p. 6ff.

In the context of Christian-Judaic polemics In the first few centuries AD, there were many sects claiming to be Judaism (such as Pharisees, Essenes, and Sadducees), each claiming to be the correct faith.Boyarin, pp. 1–3; Boyarin cites the Talmud as saying there were 24 sects. Some scholars treat Christianity, during that era, referred to as Early Christianity, as simply one of many sects of Judaism.Boyarin, pp. 1–3. Some sects wrote polemics advocating their position and occasionally disparaging rival sects. Some scholars view the depictions of Jesus in the Talmud as a manifestation of those inter-sect rivalries—thus, the depictions can be read as polemics by the rabbinic authors of the Talmud, which indirectly criticized the rival sect (Christianity), which was growing and becoming more dominant.Schäfer, pp. 7–9.

Relationship to New Testament