Appendix - The use of witnesses and evidence in rabbinical literature

Summary

Although much of the material contained in the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds and related literature is of late or uncertain date, it is valuable for the light which it throws on the background of the Old and New Testaments. This is nowhere more true than in the study of the legal background of the New Testament concept of witness. For this reason an Appendix has been added on the use of witnesses and evidence in the Talmud and related rabbinic literature.

CRIMINAL CASES

The Jews were particularly strict in their treatment of evidence; this is clear from a study of Jewish law as developed in the Bible and the Talmud. In criminal cases of the type described in the Mishnah 'every precaution is taken to exclude the possibility that by condemning an innocent man the witnesses and the judges should themselves incur the guilt of judicial murder. While these rules undoubtedly prevented the conviction of criminals in many cases, they certainly provided the innocent person with almost complete protection. It was felt better to leave the guilty party in the hands of the divine Judge than to risk the possibility of the court shedding innocent blood.

WITNESSES IN RABBINICAL LITERATURE

According to biblical law conviction for a capital crime (e.g., apostasy, Deut. 13) required the eye-witness evidence of at least two witnesses (Num. 35: 30; Deut. 17: 6; cf. 19: 15). So seriously was the principle of multiple witness taken that the Talmud in a case involving immorality declared it to be sinful for a single witness to come forward to testify alone (Pesahim 113b). This strict insistence on eye-witness evidence also completely ruled out all circumstantial evidence (Tosefta, Sanhedrin vm.3).