Disputation of Barcelona

The Disputation of Barcelona (July 20–24, 1263) was a formal ordered medieval disputation between representatives of Christianity and Judaism regarding whether Jesus was the Jewish Messiah. It was held at the royal palace of King James I of Aragon in the presence of the King, his court, and many prominent ecclesiastical dignitaries and knights between Dominican Friar Pablo Christiani, a convert from Judaism to Christianity, and Nachmanides, a leading medieval Jewish scholar, philosopher, physician, kabbalist, and biblical commentator.

During the Middle Ages, there were numerous ordered disputations between Christians and Jews. They were connected with burnings of the Talmud, burnings of Jews at the stake, and anti-Jewish pogroms. In Barcelona, Jews and Christians were given absolute freedom to deliver their arguments however they wanted—a freedom not then otherwise available to Jews anywhere else.

The ordered disputation was organized by Raymond de Penyafort, the superior of the Christians and the confessor of James I. Christiani had been preaching to the Jews of Provence. Christiani assured the King that he could prove the truth of Christianity from the Talmud and other rabbinical writings. Nachmanides complied with the order of the King, but stipulated that complete freedom of speech should be granted.

The disputation took place in front of the royal court of King James of Aragon (1263), who guaranteed and asserted freedom of speech for the Jewish spokesperson Nachmanides. This led to a genuine confrontation between Christianity and Judaism in which the true fundamental differences between the two religions could be brought to light.

The debate turned on the following questions:

Based upon several aggadic passages, Christiani argued that Pharisaic sages believed that the Messiah had lived during the Talmudic period, and that they must therefore have believed that the Messiah was Jesus.

Nachmanides countered that Christiani's interpretations of Talmudic passages were per-se distortions; the rabbis would not hint that Jesus was the Messiah while, at the same time, explicitly opposing him as such:

"Does he mean to say that the sages of the Talmud believed in Jesus as the messiah and believed that he is both human and divine, as held by the Christians? However, it is well known that the incident of Jesus took place during the period of the Second Temple. He was born and killed prior to the destruction of the Temple, while the sages of the Talmud, like R. Akiba and his associates, followed this destruction. Those who compiled the Mishnah, Rabbi and R. Nathan, lived many years after the destruction. All the more so R. Ashi who compiled the Talmud, who lived about four hundred years after the destruction. If these sages believed that Jesus was the messiah and that his faith and religion were true and if they wrote these things from which Friar Paul intends to prove this, then how did they remain in the Jewish faith and in their former practice? For they were Jews, remained in the Jewish faith all their lives, and died Jews - they and their children and their students who heard their teachings. Why did they not convert and turn to the faith of Jesus, as Friar Paul did? ... If these sages believed in Jesus and in his faith, how is it that they did not do as Friar Paul, who understands their teachings better than they themselves do?"