It was Mead who found that ‚the identification of Balaam (Bileam) with Jeschu[1] in a number of the Talmud stories we are considering cannot possibly be held in doubt, will be amply seen from the passages which we are now about to bring forward‘.
As Mentioned above, Yeshu Natzri is identified with Ha-Mitzri. Minchat Y'hudah on Vayiqra 24:11, Chapter 61 says that Ha-Notzri is Ha Mitzri .
Josephus, J.W. 2.13.5 §261-263
footnote 5. D. Rokeach, "Ben Stada is Ben Pantera-Towards the Clarification of a Philological-Historical Problem," Tarbiz 39 (1969-70) 9-18 (Hebrew). Herford (Christianity in Talmud and Midrash, 37, 345) speculates that the Egyptian Jew who in 56 C.E. claimed to be able to command Jerusalem's walls to collapse (cf. Josephus, J.W. 2.13.5 §261-263; Ant. 20.8.6 §169-172; Acts 21:38) may have been the original Ben Stada Later forgotten, his name and the criticisms that went with it were applied to Jesus. Klausner (Jesus, 21-22) and Goldstein (Jesus in the Jewish Tradition, 57-62) agree, believing that this identification arose late. Bringing "spells from Egypt in a cut" means smuggling magic spells out of the country by hiding them in an incision in one's flesh; cf. Herford, Christianity in Talmud and Midrash, 36. Whereas Herford (Christianity in Talmud and Midrash, 39) was convinced that Ben Pandira (or Ben Panthera) had nothing to do with Jesus ton Parthenou ("son of the virgin"), Klausner (Jesus of Nazareth, 24) was equally convinced that it did. Recently W. Ziffer ("Two Epithets for Jesus of Nazareth in Talmud and Midrash," JBL 85 [1966] 356-59) has speculated that Ben Stada and Ben Pandira are to be understood as Ben Satana and Ben Pandora. Klausner (Jesus of Nazareth, 20-23) argued that ben Stada originally did not refer to Jesus. Maier (Jesus von Nazareth, 243-55) agrees, arguing further that ben Pandira originally did not refer to Jesus. Meier (A Marginal Jew, 95-97) supports these conclusions.
