Historically, the Yemenites had no belief in Yehoshuah or Yeshua as THE Moshiah (Messiah)--this belief or endorsement was NEVER found amongst them. In addition, differing beliefs about the identities of different Messianic candidates proved problematic and perilous during the long history of the Yemen.
The same is true of the traditional and historical account of all rMb"MISTS. There was never any official recognition of any messianic candidate or person named Yehoshuah (or Jesus) or anyone else for that matter. References in our Talmud to individual ribbis or rabans who expressed a belief to other teachers as the Moshiah (or Messianic candidate) is not "official" endorsement. At any rate, it was not the person in question - who clearly did not meet the criteria.
No rMb"M din or individual rMb"Mist (or any bet din) COULD ever declare someone to be the Messiah (authoritatively)--even if he were to unequivocally meet the Torah criteria recorded in the Yad Hhazakah. And if a person appears to have met the Messianic criteria described in the Yad (in potential), we still have the major problem of a missing Sanhedrin (and arguably a Prophet) --that must be present to OFFICIALLY recognize the Messiah --as recorded in Hilkhoth Sanhedrin and Mamrim. The power of one din is irrelevant for any type of official recognition in this area. We need the Sanhedrin (and perhaps a Prophet) in order to recognize the King Messiah. So anyone can say what they want. But it doesn't add up to anything but revisionism.
If a sect arises in today's times that
pretends to make OFFICIAL or AUTHORITATIVE Messianic claims, statements or
endorsements about Messianic identities in the name of Judaism, they obviously have nothing to do with historical rMb"Mists
(ie: Talmudic Judaism closed by the Sanhedrin)--who categorically denied this possibility
(over one thousand years ago) in the rMb"M's legal code--which documented and
outlined the entire, authoritative legal system of the Sanhedrin. "The only
practical code of Jewish Law that relates to the entire Torah as a whole, is the rMb"M’s Mishneh Torah. It was written in order to put the entire breadth of
law into the hands of laymen, women, and children, besides just Torah scholars.
The best way to learn, practice and teach law in our times, is straight from the
Mishneh Torah. It is also the only comprehensive summary of the entire Talmudic
literature.
"In our times, we no longer
have texts of the Gemara that are uncensored and totally accurate. We no longer
have the tradition required to identify non-authoritative conclusions added into
the Gemara by post-Talmudic sages. We no longer have the ability to accurately
distinguish between the authentic traditions received by the Geonim—which were
not included in the Gemara—and their non-authoritative conclusions.
In addition to the rMb"M's law code, the rMb"M's beliefs and views were recorded in his own extra-legal writings. The rMb"M was not always favorable towards this person (or more likely to the person concept of this person portrayed in Christianity) as many on the web are portraying (see comments in Iggeroth Teman)--although Rambam did see the role of Islam and (even idolatrous) Christianity as positive, in the overall scheme of things.
Regarding verses that many non-Jews believe point to negative references to "Jesus" in our Talmud, this is based on perpetuated myths and misunderstandings (perhaps on purpose). However, it is true that our religion is clearly against the person *portrayed* in the New Testament (commonly referred to as "Jesus"). As to who this person actually was, and really stood for, most Jews really don't care. To put this in context, he didn't meet the Messianic criteria (in reality and in pagan Christianity), so why focus on this subject?
Point by point, Mr. Gil Student has done an excellent job of addressing and refuting so-called references of ""Jesus" in our Talmud --usually made by ignorants . Althouth I am not sure what version he used for this study, the points are interesting. Here is the link: http://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/jesusnarr.html . Even if some in our community have "chosen" to view these references in a hateful way (a long time after they were written) due to circumstances of persecution, this shame should not be used to rewrite these references which prove absolutely NOTHING about the person known as "Jesus". Also, there are clearly many different Jesus figures in our books, covering a multitude of overlapping time periods. This is not a black and white topic. The most disturbing fact of all may be the forced censorship of our books by the Church.
Rabbi Harvey Falk's book "Jesus the Pharisee" does a good job at uncovering the Talmud's real view on who he must have "really" been (as opposed to the counterfeit concept that appears in the redacted & biased New Testament), and is highly recommended. The most important thing stressed by r. Falk is that according to the historical "Yehoshuah", Christians are bound by the seven Noahide laws. One of these laws (which were punishable by death) included the prohibition against Idolatry, which discludes TRI-theism, god incarnate or other concepts of "logos/pantheon".
But the law itself is clear. Since the time of the Sanhedrin, no din has the AUTHORITY to officially recognize or endorse ANYONE as THE Messiah or King anyway. The rMb"M is our official record of Judaism--not different sects that have developed or reconstructed in recent times (whether they claim to follow Torah or not)--or that came about since the Sanhedrin ended.
Any individual can believe someone to be a Messianic candidate. That is something else.
Hopefully, this should dispel revisionist myths that are currently circulating on the web by Encyclopedia groups who are just aching to rewrite the history and dogma of the Jews to suit their agenda.