rigorousintuition.ca

This wikipedia entry about the Talmudic character "Yeshu" seems to be written with the express purpose of saying that "Yeshu" isn't meant to mean Jesus:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeshu

However, the Noahide.Org website (operated by the Hasidic sect Chabad Lubavitch) identifies the Talmudic sayings about Yeshu (sorcery, sexual immorality, idolatry) as meaning Jesus:

http://www.noahide.com/yeshu.htm

So my question is, why is a supposedly "objective" source like wikipedia engaging in what can only be described as propagandizing?

^^Because wiki is only as objective as those who edit it? Is this really a surprise to you? It's "democratic" more than "objective".

On the plus side, if this really bothers you that much, you'd be better served by editing that article to make it more objective, instead of complaining about it on other internet forums.

If I edit it, somebody will call it "vandalism" and change it back, that's how wikipedia is. Wikipedia is alot like America: theoretically it's a democracy; in practice it's run by an "elite" clique who decide what's true and what's false.

ibn_al_quti wrote:If I edit it, somebody will call it "vandalism" and change it back, that's how wikipedia is. Wikipedia is alot like America: theoretically it's a democracy; in practice it's run by an "elite" clique who decide what's true and what's false.

Indeed. This is why I run my own website about biblical (mainly chronological) issues. http://neros.lordbalto.com/Contents.htm

I haven't yet decided what the relationship is between the two characters, though it's becoming less and less probable that anyone fitting the popular description lived anytime during the first century AD. As for BC, there is a surplus of messianic/avataric characters many of whom fit the mold more or less accurately. It really is an historical quandary.