 Although the Jews for Jesus' Messianic Jewish movement is a relatively recent development in its present form, the groundwork for it was laid by the ecumenical movement. Ecumenicism, however, does have, ancient and, for the Jew, dangerous precedents. The winds of change that Vatican II, unloosed into the Christian world, are beginning And even though the position of the Catholic Church vis-a-vis Jews and Judaism has yet to show any substantive, meaningful change, the new methodology of the Church regarding the treatment of the problem of the people of Israel has begun to emerge. The main bridge that the Church hopes to use in expanding a positive relationship with Jewish people, particularly in the United States, is that of the open forum or dialogue, the Church is now much interested to foster open public discussions between Jews and Christians of the differences and similarities of the two major religions of Western man. In so doing, the Church has struck a responsive chord in certain Jewish circles once again, particularly in the United States. Unlike Orthodox Jewry, the agencies representing the conservative, reform, and secular wings of Jewry have committed themselves to participation in this dialogue. The exception of Orthodoxy is notable for two reasons. First, it is one of the few policy decisions that all of Orthodoxy is in accord with. Secondly, Orthodoxy's position is disturbing to both the Christian and non-Orthodox Jewish participants. Not to have the cooperation and blessing of the traditional Jew whose participation all feel would give such an exchange real substance lends a certain quality of hollowness to the dialogue. However, the idea of a dialogue between Christians and Jews is not a 20th century thought, but was already explored centuries ago, albeit in a different environment and under other circumstances. The most famous example of an exchange of this order is the debate that took place in the city of Barcelona, Spain, in the year 1263. James I of Aragon sat on the throne of northern Spain, and the spirit of Christian dominance of the civilized world was wafted in the air. 704 years have passed since then, but in the record of that dialogue written by Rabbi Moshe bin Nachman, commonly called the Ramban, and in the non-Jewish world, Nachmanides, and preserved by both Jewish and non-Jewish sources, one senses the grandeur and terror of that moment in Barcelona, and a feeling of immediacy and relevancy overtakes the reader of that record. For here are our modern day problems, differences, disputes, and bitterness poured out on an ancient canvas, and curiously the positions of the antagonists have changed very little in the seven centuries that have since swept by. It will be the attempt of this video to reflect some of the thoughts and words of this debate, and thereby emphasize that that cascading dash to dialogue may perhaps be merely the foolish pursuit of an unattainable and ephemeral illusion. Some historical background. James I, who was destined to reign 63 years over the province of Aragon, was, as medieval monarchs went, a friend of the Jews. During the period of his reconquest of Catalonia and Aragon from the Moors, he consistently displayed a tolerance and sympathy toward the Jewish residents of those communities. He encouraged Jewish immigration to those lands, appointed Jews to vital governmental positions, and generally did nothing to enter fear with the Jew's ability to practice and worship in the tradition of their fathers. However, then as now, changes were being felt in the structure of the Roman Catholic Church, particularly in Spain. The reforms in the church initiated by Pope Innocent III and continued by Gregory IX reached Spain and rested in the province of Aragon, where the Holy Office of the Inquisition was to reach dominance. The Dominican confessor to James I, Ramon de Penaforte, was noted for his zeal to punish, persecute, and or convert Jews. An Aragon and his influence over the King was notable. From 1228 to 1250, a series of anti-Jewish economic edicts were issued by the King, which helped foster a climate of anti-Jewish feelings in the land. In 1254, the famous trial of the Talmud in Paris occurred, and the Talmud was found guilty of stating calamities against Christianity and cartloads of Talmudic manuscripts were burned by the order of Louis IX of France. When this coercion had little or no effect on the Jews or on their reverence for the Talmud, the Dominican friars of Spain benefiting by the lesson of their French colleagues changed their strategy. No longer was the Talmud criticized, it was rather extolled. The madrash now became an accepted source book of accurate portrayals and Jewish scholarship was no longer publicly reviled. The reason for this was ingeniously simple. The truth of Christianity would now be proven not from Christian or other non-Jewish sources, but rather from the Talmud and the madrash themselves. It was their obstructionism that prevented the Jews from seeing the light of Christianity emanating from their own holy books. This new approach was spearheaded by an apostate Jew who had become a leader in the Catholic Church of Aragon, Pablo Christiani. Because of his zeal to convert his fellow Jews, he goaded Raymond the King's Confessor to convince James to order a public debate regarding the proofs in the Talmud as to the veracity of Christianity. The burden of defending the Talmud and the Jews fell upon the venerable shoulders of one of the greatest of all Talmudists, Rabbi Moshe Ben Nachman. On the 20th day of July, 1263, at the court of James I of Aragon, this dialogue began. It was to last until the 31st of July, though actual debating sessions occupied only four days of this time. The shock of this debate was to leave scars on the memories of both protagonists which have lasted to this day, the debate. The record of the debate that forms the basis of this video is one written by one of the protagonists himself, the Ramban, written in a clear and lucid Hebrew style. It presents a picture of the debate and a record of the polemics as seen and heard by the Ramban. At the outset, Moshe Ben Nachman insisted that he be granted the right of free speech throughout the debate. This right was guaranteed to him by the King. And because of this right, the Ramban at all times spoke boldly, incisively, and openly. It was the presence of this guarantee that made this medieval debate in reality a modern one in which both sides speak their minds without intimidation. Such an open debate was a rarity in Christian Europe until our own times. Later events proved to the Ramban how costly the exercise of this freedom would prove to him personally. I would presume to state that this freedom of expression is what uniquely characterizes and ennobles this discussion and precludes any comparison with the earlier debate of Rabbi Yehiel of Paris or the later encounter at Tortosa. For here, perhaps for the only time in the annals of medieval Christian European history, Jew meets Gentile as equal and for the majority of the debate is not the defendant or apologist, but rather presses home his criticism and disbelief of Christian concepts and principles. Rabbi Moshe Ben Nachman summarized one main historical argument against the acceptance of Christianity by the Jews of Aragon, and in so doing he attempted to entirely avoid the necessity of debating Talmudic or Madrasic references to Jesus. It has been proposed to me that the wise men of the Talmud themselves believed that Jesus was the Messiah and that he was a man and a god and not merely a mortal man alone. But is it not a well-known fact that the incidents and events of Jesus occurred at the time of the Second Temple and that he was born and died before the destruction of that temple and the rabbis of the Talmud such as Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues died after the destruction of the temple and the editor of the Talmud, Drabashi, lived almost 400 years after the temple's destruction? If it would be true that these wise men of the Talmud believed in Jesus and in the truth of his religion, how then did they themselves remain faithful to the religion and practices of the Jews? For they lived and died as Jews, they and their children and their disciples, unto this very day, and they are the ones who have taught us the faith of Judaism, for we are all Talmudic Jews. And if they believed in Jesus as you are trying to impute from their words, why did they not behave as Friar Paul, Pablo Christiani, who evidently understands their words better than they and themselves convert? His argument resounds through the halls of time, the classic answer of Jewish tradition. If our forefathers who witnessed Jesus saw his works and knew him did not hearken unto him, how should we accept the words of our King, James the First, who himself has no first-hand knowledge of Jesus and was not his countrymen as were our forefathers? Here the Ramban puts into awful clarity the basic point of contention between Jews and Christians. The stubbornness of the Jews stems not from his perfidy, but rather from the fact that he is convinced of the truth of his own belief and is not the slightest convinced by the truth of Christian belief. The current Vatican scheme on the Jews remains unclear as to whether Christianity has yet come to grips with this fact. For it does not yet specify the cause of the Jews' affirmation of the one and denial of the other. It merely hopes through better social relations to soften if not reverse that affirmation and denial. The Dominicans were not deterred from their purpose by the Ramban's onslaught. They brought numerous passages from Talmudic and Madrasic literature to prove the truth of their faith. The Ramban stated that he did not consider himself bound by the agadot of the Talmud and therefore no proofs could be deduced from them. However, he said that even if he granted their accuracy, they in no way agreed with Christian thought or belief. His strength in swimming in the sea of Talmud easily refuted his antagonists who were not nearly as erudite in the subject matter as he and he used every opportunity to return to the offensive against his opponents. Does not the prophet say regarding the Messiah that he shall reign from sea to sea and from the river to the ends of the earth and has not your empire declined since it accepted Christianity? Do not your enemies, the Muslims, rule over a greater empire than yours and does not the prophet also say that at the time of the Messiah they shall not teach their friends war etc. And is it not written that then the world should be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea and from the days of Jesus until now the entire world is full of robbery and pillaging and the Christians have spilled more blood than any of the other nations and they are also sexually immoral? How hard it would be how hard it would be for you my great king and for your knights to survive if there would be an end to warfare. This indictment of the status of the Christian or as we call it today the western world is even sharper in our time and when over 50 million people have been destroyed by war in the last century alone and when all of the economies and of the great powers of the world rest on a foundation of defense spending and war preparation. Ramban further stated that the basic dispute between Christianity and Judaism is not regarding the messianic mission of Jesus himself as much as it is regarding the entire Christian concept of divinity and belief. Listen to me my master my king said that Ramban our contention and judgment with you is not primarily concerning the messiah for you are more valuable to me than the messiah you are a king and he is a king you are a Gentile king and he is a king of Israel for the messiah will only be flesh and blood as you are when I serve my creator under your sovereign rule in exile poverty oppression and humiliated by the nations that constantly insult us my reward for the service is indeed great for I bring forth a voluntary sacrifice to God of my own being and through this shall I merit a greater portion of the world to come however when there will be a king of Israel abiding by my Torah who shall rule over all the nations then I shall be involuntarily compelled to attain my faith in the Torah of the Jews and therefore my reward shall not be as great as it is now however the main dispute and disagreement between the christian and the Jews is in that you have some very sorry beliefs regarding the essence of divinity itself thus did the Ramban emphasize clearly that the fundamental differences between Judaism and Christianity are not those of detail and history but rather those of definition and understanding of the nature of divinity and his relation to man the question of original sin was also touched upon in this debate both Pablo and King James asserted that all men had been condemned to hell because of the original sin of Adam but the advent of belief in Jesus had released them from the state of eternal damnation to this the Ramban retorted with bitter irony in our province we have a saying he who wishes to lie should be sure that the witnesses to the transaction are far away there are many punishments mentioned in regard to adam and eve the earth was cursed thorns and thistles shall grow there from man shall earn his bread by the sweat of his brow and that man shall return to the dust and that woman shall suffer the pain and travail of childbirth all these conditions yet exist to this day and anything tangible that can be evidence as the alleviation of any of these conditions has yet to appear even since the advent of your messiah but the curse of damnation to hell which scripture nowhere records this is the punishment which you say was relieved by Jesus is coming for this is the one matter which no one can disprove send from your midst someone and let him return and report to us God forbid that the righteous should be punished in hell for the sin of the first man adam for my soul is as equally related to the soul of the wicked pharaoh as to the soul of my father and i shall not be punished by the damnation of my soul because of the sins of that pharaoh and punishments that accrue to mankind become because of the sin of adam were physical bodily punishments my body is given to me by my father and mother and therefore if it was ordered that they be mortal and die so will their children forever be mortal and die for this is the law of nature but the rambam stated the soul of man which is given to him by the eternal creator is not damned because of the sin of others even of his ancestors themselves unless he himself continues in their evil ways the rambam thereupon entered into a theological disputation regarding the theories of the virgin birth and the trinity he proved them not to be jewish in origin and that therefore the mind of no jew could understand or accept them he stated that your words regarding the talmud and the messiah are therefore for naught because this is the kernel of our disagreement but if you wish to discuss the concept of messiah i will bow to your wishes he told the king that you believe this bitter thing regarding divinity the virgin birth and the concept of the trinity because you are born a christian the son of a christian parents and you have been indoctrinated your entire life by priests who have filled your mind and marrow with this belief and you now accept its truth by basis of habit alone his criticism of these tenets of the roman catholic faith placed in sharp focus the reason for the jew's refusal to accept christianity from its very onset its notion of god was and is foreign to jewish tradition and logic nothing has yet occurred to change this status either for the jew or the christian the debate ended rather abruptly it was never formally closed but the king recessed it apparently out of fear of rioting by fanatical mobs stirred up by emotional servants of certain dominican friars the king himself took an active part in the debate and one is struck by the fairness and tolerance of james the first it was only the deceitful friars who distorted the teachings of the talmud he is quoted by the ramban as having told him that i have yet to see such a man as you who though being wrong has made an excellent presentation of his position the rambam also notes that he received a gift of 300 coins from james evidently is reimbursement for his expenses the rambam states that i departed from the king with great affection moshe ben nachman remained in barcelona for over a week and was present for a sermon in the synagogue on the following sabbath delivered by a dominican priest in the presence of king james calling on the assembled jews to convert to christianity the dominicans angered by the rambam successful defense turned their rap against him personally he was sentenced to temporary exile from aragon and had to pay a fine for speaking blasphemy in his old age broken by the ordeal of his persecution and by a vision of the sorrows that would that would yet befall the jews of spain rabbi moshe ben nachman emigrated to the land of israel in the year 1267 and on its holy soil he expired shortly thereafter in conclusion the importance of this encounter between the jews and the christian world is not to be minimized it would be many centuries before jews dared to speak so openly to their christian fellow countrymen about the fundamental differences that separate them to our very day no other jewish religious leader of the caliber of the rambam responsible and responsive to his faith and tradition ever presented our case those who presumed to speak for judeism in today's dialogues would do well to read the record of this dialogue seven centuries ago i do not believe that the case for jews and judeism can be better stated with as much candor compassion and truth that in the matter in which it was reflected in the words of rabbi moshe ben nachman both jew and christian would profit by a study of that record from barcelona before plunging headlong into any new dialogue or acumenical discussion the issues and the world itself have changed little from the days of james the first of aragon neither has the people of israel