LISTEN VT RADIO | JOIN TEAM VT | SIGN UP DAILY NEWSLETTER
VETERANS TODAY ON : FACEBOOK | TWITTER | VT FORUM
|

Is The Talmud Defensible As A Holy Text?

Question:  Has the time come for people of conscience to acquaint themselves with the Jewish Talmud?

 

by Cassandra for Veterans Today

 

After all that has happened, is it time for everyone to start buying Talmud compendia and distributing them to friends and family?—with certain passages marked and highlighted?  Maybe a little stocking-stuffer this Christmas?

Become a genius!

Maybe slip one in the mailbox of your favorite Christian zionist?  Or send copies to soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq, so they can see what they’re fighting for?  It could certainly liven up some dull evenings.

Maybe those guys who remotely operate killer drones from a safe location would be interested in learning something new—to give them a little perspective on what they are doing, and for whom.

You could put up a sign in your yard, automobile, or business, displaying a Talmud Quote of the Week.  Think of it as a public service announcement—and keep spare copies of your compendium to show to critics who complain.  Maybe when they see that those words really are in the Talmud—it’s not just something perverted you made up—they will experience a sudden paradigm shift.  An aha-moment, if you will.

Certain Christian evangelicals love to rail against the Koran, a book they’ve never read, as the source of all evil in the world.  I suspect some of them are unaware of the content of their own Old Testament, which celebrates the slaughter, rape and pillage of other peoples.

A NOBEL LAUREATE & A GENIUS

But their greatest ignorance of all concerns Judaism’s holy books—not the Torah but the Talmud, which is a series of interpretations of early Judaic law, written by later rabbinical scholars.  Think of it as an exhaustive collection of technicalities allowing one to get around the law—with the notable addition of directives to persecute non-Jews, who are not considered human—and to do so as a religious duty.  Surprisingly, the content of the Talmud has not rendered it obsolete or embarrassing to modern orthodox Jews who study it, revere it, and live by it.  It’s the kind of thing that never gets mentioned at Holocaust Museums, the History Channel, or in Hollywood films like Exodus.  Nothing about it in The Fiddler On The Roof either.  So I thought I’d mention it here, for folks who don’t know.  When an ethnic group has a religious duty to persecute everybody else, that’s a pretty big deal.

In certain European countries holocaust-denial is a criminal offense, based on the notion that it promotes racism and genocide.   Shouldn’t Talmudism be a crime in those countries, and for the same reason?  Doesn’t the assertion that all the world’s non-Jews are animals unworthy of compassion meet the criterion?

What are we to do about venerable holy texts that contain evil things?  Do we just give them a pass?

Jews suffered political setbacks, throughout the centuries, whenever Gentiles discovered what was in the Talmud.  Later versions, created for Gentile readers, were “cleaned up” so as to soften and obscure the offending parts; but the original texts are still used without apology by true believers.

This is an issue for modern Jews finally to confront squarely, and choose their allegiances: Is the Talmud defensible as a holy text?  And can Jews ever be accepted by the world so long as they fail to renounce it and make apology?

I believe the answer is no.  Israel Shahak and others argue, convincingly, that its genocidal doctrine inspires covert evil, ultimately endangering the non-Talmudic Jews of the world by association—not to mention endangering the rest of us as well.

So perhaps a little sunlight is needed to bring this out into the open?

Does anyone have a “favorite” Talmud passage to share?

I recommend Israel Shahak’s excellent Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, well worth reading.  My edition has forewords by both Gore Vidal and Edward Said.

 


ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Cassandra has a BA in psychology and also an MSW degree. She does a little writing, a lot of reading, and is an avid gardener. She works occasionally for a small publisher in her hometown, and dabbles in herbal medicine, medical issues and natural sciences.

Read more from this author:

 

 

Bookmark and Share

Related Posts:

Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=135638

The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT or any other VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors or partners. Legal Notice

Posted by on Aug 29 2011, With 0 Reads, Filed under Americas, Asia, Britain United Kingdom, Editor, Europe, Israel, Middle East, Palestine, World. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Get Your Loan Now
Apply for VA Loan Now
Education
Get Your Loan Now
Get Your Loan Now
Get Your Loan Now
Apply for your VA Home Loan Now
Apply for your VA Home Loan Now
Apply for your VA Home Loan Now
Apply for Jobs on HireVeterans.com Now
Apply for Jobs on HireVeterans.com Now
Apply for Jobs on HireVeterans.com Now
body mind baja

COMMENTS

To post, we ask that you login using Facebook, Yahoo, AOL, or Hotmail in the box below.
Don't have a social network account? Register and Login direct with VT and post.
Before you post, read our Comment Policy - Feedback


Comments Closed

118 Comments for “Is The Talmud Defensible As A Holy Text?”

  1. Ironically, the religious anti-Zionist Jews actually get their Anti-Zionist stance from some parts of the Talmud which many non-Jewish anti-Zionists are bashing here. Perhaps, there are some parts that you like and some parts that you don’t like in the Talmud, just like you do with parts in the Bible. Many religious Jews claim that the oral law, the Talmud was reveled by God on Mt. Sinai along with the written law, the Torah. However, there are many things recorded in the Talmud from a thousand years later that were said by specific rabbis.

    • Would you like to elaborate on that Johnny? Are you a religious anti-Zionist Jew? What are the parts of the Talmud that have inspired you to oppose Zionism?

  2. JJ
    The Torah (Old Teastament) also describes the slaughter of approx. 24,634,205 souls, that were supposedly killed by God. The jews that wrote the Torah, forget to tell you which god they were taking orders from. The New Teastament overrides the Old. The reason jews don’t accept that, is because their rabbis will never put God (Christ) above them. They long for the power and exaltation they received prior to Jesus Christ comming to earth. Accepting Jesus, means they are not G-d. As we all know, satan wants to take Gods place. That is what the anti-Christ is all about. They are the anti-Christ.

    Drunk With Blood God’s killing in the Bible 2010 ISBN 10: 145366291X

    • Well Doug all I can say is, Christians historically have been in hot competition with everyone else for greatest-number-killed-in-the-name-of-God. Since some of those “Christians” have covertly worked at the behest of Jewish interests, I couldn’t tell you what the current score is or who’s ahead. The picture is seriously muddled.

  3. The Torah is the first five books of The Holy Bible I do believe. It has Gods COMMANDMENTS; LAWS; Statutes; Judgements; Economic Policy; Agricultural Policy and Diet that believers here on earth are suppose to live by.

  4. Jesus was not a jew, as are the so called jews of today. Jesus was born in Palestine. The blood relatives of Jesus (True Semites) in Palestine, are being holocausted today, and that is no holohoax.
    Any so called “Christian,” that doesn’t stand against this horrible crime, will have a rude awakening in the end.

    • I agree. Jesus was not a Jew. Judeans came to be callled Judeans not because they belonged to a particular ethnicity, but because they lived in Judea (like what we say Athenians or Romans- tho they did belong to a particular ethnicity). Jesus was born near mount Carmel in today’s Lebanon and Palestine border. “Jews” are mongurk (mongoloid turk) or White Hun converts. They have nothing to do with Europeans or Middle easterns. The word “Jew” did not exist more than 150 years ago. “Jesus was a Jew” mantra is another hoax to fool Christians.

    • “The blood relatives of Jesus (True Semites) in Palestine, are being holocausted today” – Yes – Tragically ironic

      “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.”
      “Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted.”
      “Blessed are the poor, in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”

      Clearly these ancient words from the Sermon on the Mount stand in direct opposition to today’s American/Israeli Global Death Machine.

      • Cassandra,

        Agreed, the Sermon on the Mount evokes tears from some faint remembrance we all carry of what might be. It is very counterintuitive, as are all mystical teachings, every one, perhaps none more than “love your enemies.”

        It is indeed ironic that most “Christian” religions eschew the teachings of Jesus. What a world we would have if the words of the Sermon on the Mount were embraced!

        John

        • “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you” is counter to the neocon/zionist/objectivist philosophy of survival of the most ruthless.

          Ruthlessness often wins out!

          However, humans do have within them a sense of justice. Sometimes they rise up against intolerable oppression, catching their oppressors by surprise.

          There’s a very engaging and interesting book by Robert Sapolsky, “A Primate’s Memoir”. It’s a great read, and it demonstrates that even baboons have a sense of justice; alpha males who abuse their position will meet their karmic fate down the road.

          • Absolutely!

            “A good world needs knowledge, kindliness, and courage; it does not need a regretful hankering after the past or a fettering of the free intelligence by the words uttered long ago by ignorant men.” Bertrand Russell

  5. PS – Good point John about “new” insights in science are “good” (although they aren’t always good), while the older a religion is, the more respect it will get and the less its absurdities will be questioned.

    • Not always. Sometimes, the new replaces the old in religion too. Didn’t old paganism get replaced with the Old Testament and the Old Testament being replaced with the New Testament?

  6. I agree John. Douglas Reed pointed out the utter incompatibility of the OT and NT, and it suddenly seemed so obvious, what I had never thought of before: that not only were the two different, but they were so different they didn’t belong together. What Jesus stood for was completely opposed to what many OT heroes and priests were all about: the rigid authoritarianism, the ambition and materialism, the deceit and vengeance, the war-making, the endless laws and punishments, the obsession with ritual and tithes and offerings and cleanliness to the exclusion of simple compassion for one’s fellow human being; and the notion of an angry, jealous, unforgiving god who engages in collective punishment on a massive scale whenever he’s riled.

    Jesus was a real trouble-maker, offering a completely different way of looking at righteousness and obedience to God, and making the Pharisees and Sadducees look really bad in the process. It makes no sense to include the OT in the Christian Bible; Jesus represented almost a clean break with that past. That’s the reason he was so hated and reviled. In that authoritarian system, independent thinking and rule-breaking were not tolerated. Jesus criticized the priests, hung out with sinners and prostitutes, and made a big stink about the money-lending that was going on in the temple. That’s a good way to get yourself killed.

    Although I am religiously unaffiliated, my favorite thing about Jesus is the Sermon on the Mount, when he reminded listeners that God commanded them to love their neighbor as themselves, and somebody asked, “Who is my neighbor?”—-which was a pertinent religious question, because among the Israelites, your “neighbor” was understood to be a fellow Jew only—goyim were not included in that deal. But Jesus’ reply to the question, revealing his universalist spirit, was to tell the parable of the good Samaritan. For those who are not familiar with it: Samaritans of the day were a lesser sect of Jews who were outcast and despised among the mainstream; they were second-class citizens who endured many indignities. As the story goes, a Jewish man traveling on the road was assaulted by robbers, severely beaten and left for dead. As he lay there all bloody, unable to get up, a priest dressed in fine robes came along; but since the man was unclean the priest crossed over to the other side of the road and went by. A proud Levite came along too, but he also went by on the other side; the man was unknown to him and thus no concern of his. But a kind-hearted Samaritan came and found the man, bound his wounds, took him to an inn, and gave the innkeeper money to pay for his care until he was able to travel again.

    The story is analogous to an American black man stopping to help rich white people whose car is broken down, while other rich white people whiz by, focused on their own concerns. It takes a special kind of love and mercy to view all the earth’s people as your brothers, even those who have despised or harmed you. This to me is emblematic of what Jesus stood for, in addition to his denunciations of wealth and pride, and his advocacy of mercy for transgressors—-all of which was utterly contrary to Levitical law as it was being enforced at the time. The Alpha Males would have seen his disobedience and universalism as radical and dangerous.

    So how did the OT end up in the Christian Bible? If I recall correctly, Douglas Reed contends it was Jewish influence that put it there, so as to maintain a connection with Christians as they were rising in prominence and power.

    • Of course, one could chose to ignore the many OT verses that are quoted in the NT as well as Jesus, his Apostles and early followers as being Judean (Jewish?) too. We could say that they were Greek (Gentile?) because the NT was first written in Greek, but then so was the Septuagint (OT) too. With the above Talmud quotes, does it say pagan nations (goyim) or Nazarenes (Christians) exactly? An exact accurate literal translation along with the surrounding context would help just like when reading the Bible which many like to select and mistranslate verses and take them out of their own context.

      • You make a good point, John. Jesus was a Jew, and he certainly regarded himself as one. He just didn’t respect the hypocrites and charlatans who were throwing their weight around, interpreting God’s will their own way, and thinking themselves supremely holy because of the conspicuousness of their prayers and offerings. Jesus was comparable to Martin Luther who saw the truth about an utterly corrupt Catholic church far removed from its religious roots.

        Greek was the language of scholars during that period, regardless of their nationality.

        • FYI – learn a little more about Bible History and you may think a little differently:

          Was Jesus Jewish?

          Jesus was not Jewish or Hebrew as we typically think they were called back then. (letter “J” invented in the 15th Century). Two typically different arguments are that he was either Judean of Galilean. Search the term “Jesus not a Jew” and you’ll see two scholarly opinions from Benjamin Freedman or Jason Collett.

          The reason you (the public) thinks he is a Jewish is solely political due to a consorted effort in the 19th Century to infiltrate Bibles published in the 19th Century that made such claims. The one in particular in the Scolfield Bible which ties Cyrus Scolfield in with the Zionists in Switzerland in the late 1800’s where he finalized his version (first ed) in the same place where the First Zionist Congress was being held. All Bibles, not readily available today, published prior to the 19th Century do not have this error. That is why it takes scholars who have access to them to point it out.

          Even if Jesus was Hebrew or Jewish, that does not give anyone who is Jewish or a Zionist a pass to commit fraud, treason, espionage or subversion. If you read the Talmud and believed it, that would not be the case.

          • I understand the vagaries of Jewish, Judean, Israelite, Hebrew, Ashkenazi, Sephard, Palestinian, etc. etc. etc. but I didn’t want to get tangled up in that while I was making another point. I just meant he was ethnically the same as the group he protested against.

    • Cassandra,

      I am an engineer, not a biblical scholar, but I can’t help but wonder if the reason the OT ended up in the Bible was only to give the NT legitimacy. Then Christianity would not be a “new” religion. The mechanism for that would be through the OT prophecy of the Messiah to come. (As I said earlier, in religion only, the more ancient the belief, the more legitimacy it seems to acquire.)

      I have not read the Torah either, but I believe it includes the first few chapters of the OT. The thought of a 21st century people actually subscribing to the ghastly notions portrayed in the OT is chilling, particularly if they are armed with hundreds of nuclear weapons, in control of much of the media and are able to manipulate world finances.

      John

  7. AR save it youre obviously a yiddish hasbarat troll. stop killing Palestinian children, murderers. I hope russia or pakistan get tired of you and bombs shitty-little -so- called -israel for three or four months and leaves it there burning for a yearor two .

  8. Cassandra,

    You seem to have once again struck a nerve. Good for you! I like your insight.

    It is interesting, is it not, that science and technology eagerly embraces the latest understanding of the physical world. The newer the insight, the more valid it is.

    Science patronizingly remembers the ancient ideas, such as “Air, fire, water, earth,” but recognizes that it was a naive understanding, the best that could be done at the time.

    The mainstream religions, on the other hand, embrace only what is ancient, and reject out of hand any contemporary spiritual revelation as being heretical. The older the insight, the more valid it is.

    Curiously, Western culture seems to accommodate both of these strategies to behold what is “true.”

    I have always found it odd that Christianity would include the Old Testament in its Bible, given how diametrically opposed it is to the New Testament. Perhaps it was included only to give some validity to the New Testament (In the religious world, the older the idea, the more valid it must be.)

    John

    • “I have always found it odd that Christianity would include the Old Testament in its Bible, given how diametrically opposed it is to the New Testament.”
      beautiful. i keep repeating this to evangelists here in Venezuela and they wont listen.theyare like zombies. how could you love the Jews when they deny him, disrespect him and -some say- KILLED HIM!

  9. After reading the comments, I just see the same ole same ole. AR has some very intense same ole same ole:

    “Righteous gentiles have a place in the world to come.”

    That place will be in service to the jews, namely the rabbis, as a Noahide. Would AR care to explaine what a Noahide is, and what happens to all the Goys that refuse it?

  10. Christ himself told you all about them.
    For further study of the Talmud, go to:
    http://www.comeandhear.com/

    Kev Boyle had this almost complete list on his blog, some months back, I saved it to pass around. I’m sure he won’t mind. Also read Judaism Discovered by Michael Hoffman. It’s quite the read!

    TALMUDIC QUOTATIONS

    1. “We beg Thee, 0 Lord, inflict Thy wrath on the nations not believing in Thee. Take away, 0 Lord, all hope from them. Destroy all foes of Thy nation.” -Synagaga Judaica, p. 212. Minhagen, p. 23. Crach Chain, 480 Magah.

    2. “The teachings of the Talmud stand above all other laws. They are more important than the laws of Moses.” -Rabbi Issael, Rabbi Chasbar, et. al.

    3. “The decisions of the Talmud are words of the living God. Jehovah Himself asks the opinion of the earthly rabbis when there are difficult affairs in heaven.” -Rabbi Menechen Commentary on Fifth Book

    4. “Jehovah Himself studies the Talmud standing, he has such respect for that book.” -Tract Mechillo

    5. “It is more wicked to question the words of the rabbis than those of the Torah.” -Michna Sanhedryn 11:3

    6. “It is forbidden to disclose the secrets of the law. He who would do it would be as guilty as though he destroyed the whole world.” – Jektat Chadasz, 171, 3

    7. “Every goy who studies the Talmud and every Jew who helps him in it, ought to die.” -Sanhedryn, 59a, aboda Zora 8-6, Szagiga 13

    8. “To communicate anything to a goy about our religious relations would be equal to the killing of all Jews, for if the goyim knew what we teach about them they would kill us openly.” -Libbre David 37

    9. “If a Jew be called upon to explain any part of the rabbinic books, he ought to give only a false explanation. Who ever will violate this order shall be put to death.” -Libbre David 37

    10. “A Jew should and must make a false oath when the goyim asks if our books contain anything against them.” -Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Via 17

    11. “The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts…” -Saba Mecia 114, 6

    12. “When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves.” -Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D

    13. “Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night.” – Midrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L

    14. “As soon as the King Messiah will declare himself, He will destroy Rome and make a wilderness of it. Thorns and weeds will grow in the Pope’s palace. Then He will start a merciless war on non-Jews and will overpower them. He will slay them in masses, kill their kings and lay waste the whole Roman land. He will say to the Jews: ‘I am the King Messiah for whom you have been waiting. Take the silver and gold from the goyim.’ ” -Josiah 60, 6. Rabbi Abarbanel to Daniel 7, 13

    15. “A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated.” -9boda Sarah 37

    16. “A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl.” -&ad. Shas. 2:2

    17. “A Jew may do to a non-Jewess what he can do. He may treat her as he treats a piece of meat.” -Hadarine, 20, B; Schulchan 9ruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348

    18. “A Jew may misuse the non-Jewess in her state of unbelief.” – Maimonides, Jak. Chasaka 2:2

    19. “IF a goy kills a goy or a Jew he is responsible; but if a Jew kills a goy he is NOT responsible.” -Tosefta. 9boda Za,-a 8, 5

    20. “It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere. It is permitted to kill him even before he denounces.” -Schuichan Qruch, Choszen Hajpiszpat jog

    21. “Thou shalt not do injury to thy neighbor (Bible), but it is not said, ‘Thou shalt not do injury to a Goy.’ ” -Mishna Sanhedryn 57

    22. “When you go to war do not go as the First, but as the last, so that you may return as the first. Five things has Kanaan recommended to his sons: ‘Love each other, love the robbery, hate your masters and never tell the truth.’ ” -Pesachis F. 113B

    23. “A Jew is permitted to rape, cheat and perjure himself; but he must take care that he is not found out, so that Israel may not suffer.” -Schulchan Aruch, Jore Dia

    24. “A Jew may rob a goy – that is,.he may cheat him in a bill, if unlikely to be perceived by him.” -Schalchan Arach, Choszen Hamiszpat 348

    25. “If a goy wants a Jew to stand witness against a Jew in a Court of Law, and if the Jew could give fair evidence, he is forbidden to do it; but if a Jew wants a Jew to be a witness in a similar case against a goy, he may do it.” -Schalchan .9ruch, Choszen Hasiszpat 28, Art. 3 and 4

    26. “Those who do not confess the Torah and the Prophets must be killed. Who has the power to kill them, let them kill them openly with the sword. if not, let them use artifices, till they are done away with.” -Schulchan Qruch. Choszon Haviszpat 425.5

    27. “All property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation, which, consequently, is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples. An orthodox Jew is not bound to observe principles of morality towards people of other tribes. He may act contrary to morality, if profitable to himself or to Jews in general’ ” – Schalchan arach. Choszen Hasisxpat 348

    28. “Should a Jew inform the goyish authorities that another Jew has much money, and the other will suffer a loss through it, he must give him emuneration.” -Schalchan Oruch, Choszen Maipiszpat 388

    29. “How to interpret the word ‘robbery.’ A goy is forbidden to steal, rob, or take women slaves, etc., from a goy or from a Jew. But a Jew is NOT forbidden to do all this to a goy.” -Tosefta, Qbda Zara VIRZ, 5

    30. “On the house of the goy one looks as on the fold of cattle.” – Tosefta, Erabin VZZ, 1

    31. “All vows, oaths, promises, engagements, and swearing, which, beginning this very day or reconciliation till the next day of reconciliation, we intend to vow, promise, wear, and bind ourselves to fulfill, we repent of beforehand; let them be illegalized, acquitted, annihilated, abolished, valueless, unimportant. Our vows shall be no vows, and our oaths no oaths at all.” -Schulchan 9ruch,

    Edit. 1, 136. The Jewish Kol Nidre “All Vows” Oath has been set to a

    morbid Jewish music, and is often heard on the radio. It is sung as a

    chant at each Yom Kippur [Jewish New Year service September 17]

    32. “Everything a Jew needs for his church ritual no goy is permitted to manufacture, but only a Jew, because this must be manufactured by human beings and the Jew is not permitted to consider the goyim as human beings.” -Schulchan Oruch, Orach Chaiw 14, 20, 32, 33, 39. TaIDud Jebamoth 61

    33. “A Jewish mid-wife is not only permitted but she is compelled to help a Jewish mother on Saturday (Jewish Sabbath) and when so doing to do anything which otherwise would desecrate the Saturday. But it is forbidden to help a non-Jewish woman even if it should be possible to help her without desecrating the Saturday, because she is to be considered only as an animal.” -Schulchan gruch, Orach Chaim 330

    34. “At the time of the Cholhamoed the transaction of any kind of business is forbidden. But it is permitted to cheat a goy, because cheating of goyim at any time pleases the Lord.” -Chuichan Qruch, Orach ChaiD 539

    35. “The Jews are strictly Forbidden to cheat their brothers and it is considered cheating already if onesixth of the value has been taken away from him. Whoever has cheated his brother has to return it to him. Naturally all that only holds towards the Jew, to cheat a goy he is permitted and he is not permitted to return to him what he cheated him out of. Because the Bible says: ‘Thou shalt not cheat thy next brother,’ but the non-Jews are not our brethren, but as mentioned above, worse than dogs.” -aruch hoszen Haniszpat 227

    And from another source comes the following

    In New York City, Jewish Menorahs are a part of city displays during Hanukkah, as are the Islamic star and crescent during Ramadan. Nativity scenes during Christmas are banned, however. Same thing in Palm Beach, Florida (yes, that Palm Beach…the one of hanging chad fame). Both are hotbeds of Jewish activism. Precursors of what is in store for the rest of America.

    The Talmud fairly bulges with expressions of animosity for the goyim (that’s you and me) and, especially, Christianity, which itself simply turns the other cheek, of course. Normally, I would give just a couple of examples, but I am going to let this list to go on at some length, just so you get a flavor of the depth of hostility for us that exists in Jewish teachings – the hostility that has led to so many things that now are wrong with America, including the destruction of Christmas, of course:

    “A Jew must not associate himself with gentiles.” – Hilkoth Maakhaloth, Ch. IX.

    “The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts.” – Saba Mecia, 114, 6.

    “Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night.” – Midrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L.

    “It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere. It is permitted to kill him even before he denounces.” -Schuichan Qruch, Choszen Hajpiszpat jog

    “Thou shalt not do injury to thy neighbor (Bible), but it is not said, ‘Thou shalt not do injury to a Goy.’ ” – Mishna Sanhedryn 57.

    “All property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation, which, consequently, is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples. An orthodox Jew is not bound to observe principles of morality towards people of other tribes. He may act contrary to morality, if profitable to himself or to Jews in general.” – Schalchan arach. Choszen Hasisxpat 348.

    “The Jew is not permitted to consider the goyim as human beings.” – Schulchan Oruch, Orach Chaiw 14, 20, 32, 33, 39. TaIDud Jebamoth 61.

    “To communicate anything to a goy about our religious relations would be equal to the killing of all Jews, for if the goyim knew what we teach about them they would kill us openly.” – Libbre David 37.

    “Although the non-Jew has the same body structure as the Jew, they compare with the Jew like a monkey to a human.” – Schene luchoth haberith, p. 250 b

    “If you eat with a Gentile, it is the same as eating with a dog.” – Tosapoth, Jebamoth 94b

    “It is the law to kill anyone who denies the Torah. The Christians belong to the denying ones of the Torah.” – Coschen hamischpat 425 Hagah 425. 5

    (Jesus Christ was) illegitimate and conceived during menstruation. Mother a Prostitute. – Kallah 1b. (18b)

    Christian birth rate must be diminished materially. – Zohar (II 64b):

    Jews must always try to deceive Christians. – Zohar (1 160a)

    Jews are not to prevent the death of a Christian. – Choschen Ham (425 5):

    Do not save Christians in danger of death, instructed to let die. – Hilkkoth Akum (x,1):

    Even the best of the Goim [Christians] should be killed. – Abhodah Zarah (25b)T

    If Jew kills a Christian he commits no sin. – Sepher Or Israel 177b

    Extermination of Christians necessary. – Zohar (11 43a):

    Make no agreements and show no mercy to Christians. – Hilkhoth Akum (x,1):

    Christians are idolaters. – Hilkhoth Maakhaloth

    Christians have intercourse with animals. – Abhodah Zarah (22a):

    Female Jews contaminated when meeting Christians. – Iore Dea (198, 48):

    Innocent of murder if intent was to kill a Christian. – Makkoth (7b)

    Christians likened to cows and asses. – Zohar II (64b):

    Psalmist compares Christians to beasts. – Kethuboth (110b):

    Sexual intercourse with Christian same as intercourse with beast. – Sanhedrin (74b)

    The seed [children] of Christians valued same as the seed of a beast. – Kethuboth (3b):

    Those Jews who do good to Christians never rise when dead. – Zohar (1, 25b)

    Jews are to hide their hatred for Christians. – Iore Dea (148, 12H):

    Christian property belongs to the first Jew claiming it. – Babha Bathra (54b):

    Keep any overpayment Christians make in error. – Choschen Ham (193, 7):

    It is permitted for a Jew to deceive Christians. – Babha Kama (113b):

    Jew may deceive Christians. – Iore Dea (157, 2) H:

    Jew may lie and perjure himself to condemn a Christian. – Babha Kama (113a):

    The name of God is not profaned when a Jew lies to Christians. – Babha Kama (113b):

    Jew may perjure himself when lying about Christians. – Kallah (1b, p. 18):

    Jews may swear falsely by the use of subterfuge wording. – Schabbouth Hag (6d):

    Jews must always try to deceive Christians. – Zohar (1, 160a):

    Christians who are not Jews’ enemies must also die. – Iore Dea (158, 1):

  11. Reading these chapters is a MUST if we are to come close to understanding the TALMUDISTS, their mentality, and their behaviour indulging in perpetual wars of GENOCIDE, but worse, is their FUTURE plans of waging wars of EXTERMINATION :

    THE LAWS OF KINGS AND THEIR WARS

    http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1188343/jewish/Melachim-uMilchamot.htm

    2) The prohibition against appointing a convert as king;

    6) The obligation to destroy the seven nations living in the Land of Canaan;

    7) The prohibition against allowing any one of them to remain alive;

    8) The obligation to destroy the descendents of Amalek;

    9) The obligation to remember what Amalek did;

    http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1188343/jewish/Melachim-uMilchamot.htm

    ============================================

    Mishneh Torah, Chapter 1, Halacha 1

    http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1188345/jewish/Chapter-1.htm

    b) To wipe out the descendents of Amalek, as Deuteronomy 25:19 states: ‘Erase the memory of Amalek;’

    Halacha 2:

    “Amalek’s seed should be annihilated before the construction of the Temple”

    “A king should not be appointed from converts to Judaism, ‘You may not appoint a foreigner who is not one of your brethren.’”

    Halacha 4

    “This does not apply to the monarchy alone, but to all positions of authority within Israel. A convert may not serve as an army commander, a leader of fifty, or as a leader of ten. He may not even supervise the allocation of water from a stream to various fields.’Appoint a king over you from among your brethren.’ This implies that all appointments must only be ‘from your brethren.’”

    .

    • It’s problematic, isn’t it nahida?

      These sacred texts contain the most alarming things; yet we are not to know of them. And if we do know of them, we are to disregard them. And if we refuse to disregard them, we are anti-semitic! Are we naive fools?

      Look, I know all cultures have had barbarities in their past. Old Testament followers of Yahweh can’t be singled out for racism and xenophobia. Human nature being what it is, lots of different people have done it all through the ages! In medieval and Renaissance Europe they were always burning witches and burning Catholics and burning Protestants, burning philosophers even—-burning whoever said the wrong thing or was out of favor. I haven’t heard of them burning Jews but it could be I missed that.

      The point is, human nature hasn’t changed but our modern expectations of what’s acceptable and civilized have. Any nation that wishes peace with others ought not to cherish religious writings that covertly condemn them and plot their downfall. Writings like these belong in the annals of cultural history maybe, but not in contemporary schools and universities, being taught to new generations of scholars as God’s unchanging truth. Not unless they don’t care about peace with others.

      Something’s got to give. This can’t be allowed to stand.

  12. At some point in the future, it will be determined that the Middle Eastern monotheistic mythologies will be a contributing factor in the demise of Western Civilization.

  13. Good going, Cassandra – got a lot of posters thinking about this.

    Are halachic precepts related to the Talmud?

    The reason I ask is because Yitzhak Rabin’s killers used them to justify his assassination.

    Back in the ’40s, as I recall, he largely caused to Altalena Affair, and in the election before the Oslo Accords, he promised never to negotiate with Arafat.

    His killers used the precepts to kill Jews who threaten Jews, and to kill Jews who threaten to turn other Jews over to non-Jewish authorites to justify their action.

  14. I agree with Douglas Reed in his classic THE CONTROVERSY OF ZION (available free online) that burning The Talmud was a horrific mistake. Better to distribute copies of it to the goyim. There’s a reason that the death penalty is proscribed in The Talmud for Goys that read it-the whole book is a reaction to the message and popularity of Jesus Christ. Plus, if you’ve read the Old and New Testaments (I have several times), you can understand why the intellectual heirs of The Pharisees felt they had to mount an offensive against Christianity. If they killed and rejected God’s son, where exactly are they left in religious terms?

    If you haven’t read Douglad Reed’s book, read it before you ever read anything again. No Jew ever responds to that book’s meesage directly, because Reed was KNOWN for being ant-Nazi. William Shirer cites him in THE RISE AND FALL OF THE THIRD REICH and THE BERLIN DIARIES. although he was a notorious name dropper and probably only mentioned Reed to gain some intellectual credibility for himself.

    As near as I can tell, the one true God stated getting mixed up with pagan idolatry, such as Moloch worship, fairly early on, and accounts for the taint of The Old and much of The New Testament. Solomon actually built a shrine to Moloch for one of his wives overlooking Jerusalem (Book of Kings).

    The Old Testament wasn’t written until about 500 b.c., and much of it was made up. I pity the fool who hasn’t read Reed’s treatment of this, but remember “The People Wept” when their religion got hijacked by the blood and death worshippers, and hating Jewish people makes as much sense as hating a kid brainwashed by a cult.

    • Checking Reeds bio and coming up with what I find in the link below I do not wonder. Mark Weber also seems to have appreciated him, his writing and, basically in his IHR article repeats what I have captured in this link:

      http://www.revisionists.com/revisionists/reed.html

      Yes, writing what he did from the situation as he saw it sixty years ago, he certainly was a prophet of current times. And, it is no wonder why he was disenfranchised, although praised, by his own powerful News organization, the London Times, and subsequently shunned by all the rest of the world’s publishers. Even then the hydra-headed cabal had a strong grip on the power centers which mattered.

      No, I shan’t bother reading his book. I am sure it is interesting, but I doubt that it can tell us anything we do not already know, and it would merely be repetitious, or prescient, of everything we read today.

      But, he is a good introduction into those dark and mysterious depths for the uninitiated and ignorant public who are just emerging from the sheltered womb in which they have taken refuge for so long, awakening, needing their eyes and ears cleaned and a good sharp whack on the bottom to get them up and shouting.

      • What I like about Douglas Reed is that he primarily cites Jewish sources for his work. Since you can’t be bothered to read the book, you’ll never know if it contains any information you don’t already know. I admit, it’s slow going, and i periodically have to reread parts of it.

        i will say this, since I decided to become an expert on this particular book about seven years ago, I simply haven’t lost a debate with anyone about Zionism. Jewish people simply ban me from posting when they are unable to refute the sources of their own religion. As for the rather cavalier dismissal of THE PROTOCOLS by the writer of this article, Reed covers that topic with the respect it deserves, as did Alexander Solzehenitsyn in TWO HUNDRED YEARS TOGETHER. If the Nobel Prize winning author of THE GULAG ARCHIPELAGO call THE PROTOCOLS a “work of genius”, I suppose most of us should defer to his wisdom.

        I do admire your “chutzpah”, though. I have seldom been patronized so effectively about my choice of literature by someone who had never even heard of the book, or the author, until today. I’m in awe.

        • Sorry pj, I didn’t mean to “cavalierly dismiss” the Protocols. It’s just that I know the reaction that comes whenever it’s mentioned: “forgery”. I’m trying to keep the focus on things that are provable; and also I’m not an expert on the Protocols, so not the best person to defend it. But if you would like to go into it, be my guest.

          If you have read Reed’s book numerous times, you are better read than I and you have much to contribute here.

        • And I should add, you are right about Reed’s book and Debbie should reconsider her inclination not to read it. (Talk about the “big picture”! – He’s got it.)

          • Cassandra,

            If you knew the crap I’ve taken for defending THE PROTOCOLS you might understand why I’m a little thin skinned, but I’m sorry if I seemed glib. I’m just seeking truth and trying not to marry any one point of view. I’m woefully ignorant, and life is too short for me to fix this. The last time I read THE PROTOCOLS I found myself thinking the US government could learn some thing about bonds and debt from it. There is much wisdom in them, though it’s of a diabolic nature. Yet, genius is genius.
            Why does Mark Levine (the radio guy) go ballistic about Obama having a Constitutional right to declare war, when this is a blatant falsehood? For my money, it’s because Levine prescribes to the idea of a “sovereign dictator” that comes right from THEPROTOCOLS. THE PROTOCOLS are called a forgery, but of what? I think people should read them with an open mind. The trouble is, as you seem to know, the title of the book elicits a trained Pavlovian reaction of revulsion from all who haven’t read it. I really did like your article, but for one small point-many Christian Zionists have the OT memorized, they just agree with it. How do you think Cromwell killed so many Irish Catholics as an act of his faith? I read this stuff as a form of self defence.

          • “just seeking the truth and trying not to marry any one point of view.”

            I like the way you put that!

            Yes, people should read almost everything with an open mind.

            Was it Cromwell’s faith that caused him to kill so many?—-or someone else’s faith?

  15. If you want to enlarge your knowledge of Talmud, YouTube Ted Pike and find a long lecture on it.
    Pike quotes the locations of each subject in the Talmud, so you can check if he is telling the truth or not.
    He does, believe me.

    The jews were not hated over the centuries because of their religion. The were, and still are, hated for their arrogance, slimy chracter and dishonesty. If you research who were the perpetrators of the biggest financial frauds, you find they are mostly jews, like Medoff, Milken, van Boer, and recently all bankers on the Wall Street who fradulently stole untold billions from retirement funds and from individual accounts.
    In the old days the kings and other heads of states kept an eye on them and many times deported them out the country. Today jewish money rules the world, our politicians are nothing but stooges and bid to the interests of such group.
    At coming elections keep an eye on you favorit politician and check where does he get his donations. You will find most of them suck on zionist breasts and sell this nation to zionist cause.

    • Yes, they are hated the most especially when they do not live according to the laws that God gave them such as the ten commandments and those found in the Old Testament of the Holy Bible. When they break these laws, people notice it more from them doing it because they were suppose to be the first people to receive these laws so that they should follow them and set a good example and not be so hypocritical by saying and teaching things that everyone else should do and then go and do other things that they shouldn’t be doing that is wrong. In comparison to the Bible, the Talmud cannot compare. Let us not forget that very strong Godly laws were given to them for keeping them in check.
      Unfortunately, sometimes were the laws are more numerous, more lawlessness and rebellion occurs.

  16. The best goyim must be killed is my “favorite” quote and the one I think about whenever I hear of our soldiers being killed, like the strange deaths of the 28 Navy Seals recently. Another is that Jews should always lie about what’s in the Talmud.

    Why is every murder, every crime, every war shrouded in lies, every investigation end in a cover up? Why are so many lawyers and judges jews? Why are jews running the “homeland security” of Libya and America?

    Read the talmud and you’ll begin to understand. The talmud consists of many volumes but parts that are of particular interest to “the goyim” are available free online. Google Elizabeth Dilling for starters.

    • Thanks Adam.

      Googled Elizabeth Dilling :

      Why is the Talmud kept so unknown to non-Jews? Why was there no usable English translation of the Talmud until the Soncino Edition, 1934-48? Why, in European history, when the laws of the Talmud became commonly known, was it burned over and over by order of the Popes, excoriated by Martin Luther, denounced everywhere, and its followers exiled from one country after another down through the centuries?

      The Talmud’s basic law is that only the Pharisee Jew ranks as a man, or human being. All others rank as animals, “the people who are like an ass — slaves who are considered the property of the master.” The attitude resulting from such teachings has been resented by non-Jews in all countries and centuries. Such resentment, however, is always portrayed by Jews as “persecution of the Jews.”

    • Why should they kill the best of the goyim since they were goyim once too who thought of themselves as the best among goyim so that they no longer consider themselves goyim. How ironic this is though.

      • No Joe, they were never goyim. They were “sons of Adam” always—-or so the Talmud teaches; set apart by Yahweh as different and special and better than goyim. Not just better but much better—–the difference between human beings and farm animals.

        “Killing the best of the goyim” refers to the teaching that a goy should not be spared on account of being a good man. No matter how good, he is still a goy and God doesn’t care about him. It’s like if he were an extra good donkey, he’s still just a donkey.

        How do they call this a religion deserving of our respect and protection?

  17. In as much as some parts of the Talmud are considered anti-Gentile and anti-Christian, some parts of the New Testament are considered anti-Jewish (anti-Judean). Were the anti-Christian parts in the Talmud written first or were the anti-Jewish parts in the New Testament written first? Were those anti-Christian parts in the Talmud a reaction to anti-Jewish parts in the New Testament or were the anti-Jewish parts in the New Testament a reaction to the anti-Christian parts in the Talmud? Why are there seemingly anti-Jewish parts in the New Testament if most of its writers were Jewish (or Judean)? Why does the Talmud say many bad things about other Jewish and/or Judean groups such as Sadducees, Samaritans, etc. besides (Jewish) Nazarenes (Christians) and pagan Gentiles too? Why is Jesus called Rabbi a few times in the NT even though the Pharisees and teachers of the Talmud were the rabbis and the Sadducees were the priests? The Judaism of Jesus’ day in Judea almost 2000 years ago consisted of many different groups that claimed that they were right and the other groups were wrong. Talmudic Judaism (Phariseeism / Rabbanism) survived because it could exist without the Temple and its priesthood due to flexibility in its own way of interpreting and changing things according to prevailing circumstances and customs.

    • Jon, It’s confusing partly because the word “jew” is a modern invention. The letter J wasn’t invented till the 16th or 17th century. Therefore, there was no such thing as a “jew” at the time the bible was written. The people who call themselves “Jews” today are not genetic descendents of the tribe of Judah. They are Edomites. Edomites are genetic descendents of Esau. True Israelites and Judahites are descendents of Abraham and Issac through Jacob-Israel. Note all the detailed “begat” lists in the bible. The bible is all about geneology, tribes, and race.

      The Edomites (Jews) infiltrated and usurped the nations of Israel and Judah just as they have done to America today. Eventually the Edomite Jews betrayed Israel and Judah into the hands of their enemies, the Assyrians and Babylonians, just as they are betraying America into the hands of our enemies.

      By the time of Christ, Herod, an Edomite, was king of Judah. Because Herod was not genetically Judean he wasn’t eligible to be their king same as today Jews have placed another ineligible usurper, Obama, on the “throne” of America. Obama either will not or cannot prove he is an American citizen much less a ‘natural born citizen.’

      These are the days of revelation, when all hidden things will be known.

    • If your statements are true, how could the New Testament be held in contempt when what is known of and about jews and the Talmud? It’s like holding the brochure about the trailhead in contempt when it warns you about “Use Caution: there might be bears on the trail”. The New Testament doesn’t go far enough in warning about jews. It should have had much more detail such as: “drive them out of your lands, shun them for they are the harbingers of death, they alone amongst men represent Satan on Earth.”

      Besides the New Testament can’t account for Eastern European ashkenazis and khazars calling themselves jews. It account for Bolshevism (which is the political doctrine of 99.99% of jews). It can’t account for the Balfour Declaration, the Rothschilds, the Illuminati, Bohemian Grove or all the other host of jewish Satanic cults in existence.

      • Vox, held in contempt by whom? The Jews?

        The Jews hold Christ and the new testament in contempt because He was against them. Remember that Herod (Edomite king of Judea) was trying to murder Christ when he ordered all Judean males under the age of 3 killed and later was later a prime mover in His crucifixion.

        The true Israelites and Judahites are the white European Christians who were already dispersed by the time of Christ. They were the “lost sheep” the apostles and disciples were sent to teach. To tell them their long-awaited Promised One had come and they were able to recognize the Messiah from prophecies concerning Him in the Old Testament.

        Again, the “jews” are NOT the Israelites of the Torah or the Old Testament. Also the word gentile is mistranslated and misunderstood. Gentile comes from the latin word “gentilis” and Latin was not one of the original bible languages. Gentile does not mean not mean “non-jew:” It simply means a racial or genetic kinsman.

        I am not a biblical scholar but there are many scholarly sources online.

        • Online Etymology Dictionary says:

          gentile (n.) late 14c., “chivalrous person; member of the nobility;” see gentile (adj.). Also used during 14c. to mean both “one who is not a Christian” and “one who is not a Jew.” The Latin word was used in Vulgate to translate Gk. ethnikos, from ta ethne “the nations,” which translated Heb. ha goyim “the (non-Jewish) nations.”

          http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=gentile

          (The Hebrew was “goyim” for non-Jew.)

          Same site also notes:
          “This noun is sometimes taken to be offensive; speakers wishing to avoid offense may prefer the term gentile (sometimes capitalized as Gentile) or simply non-Jew.”

          American Heritage Dictionary (2000) says:

          goy (goi)
          n. pl. goy·im (goim) or goys Offensive
          Used as a disparaging term for one who is not a Jew.
          [Yiddish, from Hebrew gôy, Jew ignorant of the Jewish religion, non-Jew; see gwy in Semitic roots.]

          http://www.thefreedictionary.com/goy

        • Adam, I have a hard time understanding your post. I think you misspoke when you said “The true Israelites and Judahites are the white European Christians who were already dispersed by the time of Christ.” Since there were no Christians to disperse until after the death of Christ, maybe you meant to say Jewish diaspora? And I can’t think why they would be white Europeans, since they would have been semites.

    • Jon, could you help us out by citing the parts of New Testament considered anti-Jewish? It’s not important in my view which text was written first, Talmud or NT; it’s what was written, how many times and ways it was written, and how much weight it was subsequently given to these writings.

      To criticize another group and their beliefs is one thing; to liken them to animals deserving no mercy is another; and to systematically work for their suffering and downfall—covertly, as a part of one’s religious duty—is still another. I don’t see a parallel there. But if you know of NT passages that seem to contradict me, please cite them.

  18. Charlotte NC Bill

    Read the Talmud and it becomes easy to believe the Protocols are authentic minutes fm the World Zionist Congress since 1. they simply put the anti-gentile/desire to dominate all others, which is clear in the Talmud, into action…and 2. they describe what’s actually happened over the past 100 yrs..Coincidence?

  19. Cassandra, thanks. That’s a good idea, email this piece to Churchian-Ziotics (if they were Christians they wouldn’t join the tribe), even if they crawl up the wall. “The Talmud Unmasked” by Pranaitis, the executed priest, plus “The Protocols of the Loonies of Zion”, in a single PDF file.

    http://www.4shared.com/document/OlU-DBL2/The_Talmud_Unmasked_-_Pranaiti.html

    • As to the Protocols, I don’t know its origin and don’t care to fight that battle.

      Unlike the Protocols, which remains mired in controversy, Talmud is an established part of religious texts studied and revered by Jews today. I feel this deserves some explanation.

      • Hello Cassandra,

        Thanks for broaching this subject. Finding copies of the Talmud in english and available on the internet is a bugger! Here’s a link to one version.

        http://www.halakhah.com/

        I have read many religious texts over the years, and tend to shy away from those translated by people outside of the originating culture. In the case of a Jew translating a Talmud you never know if its a psy-ops, or real. I also found a link to an 1800′s book. This looks interesting and worth more study.

        http://www.archive.org/details/talm00darm

        Cheers!

        • Thanks so much NAA for your diligence. Perhaps I should have started off by doing that, but you have saved me the trouble.

          Shahak writes, “The Babylonian Talmud (that is, the Mishnah plus the Mesopotamian Gemarah) is much more extensive and better arranged than the Palestinian, and it alone is regarded as definitive and authoritative.”

          “The Talmud itself defines the various categories of Jews, in ascending order, as follows. The lowest are the totally ignorant, then come those who only know the Bible, then those who are familiar with the Mishnah or Aggadah, and the superior class are those who have studied and are able to discuss the legal part of the Gemarah. It is only the latter who are fit to lead their fellow Jews in all things.” (pp. 39-40)

          (and he continues):
          “The legal system of the Talmud can be described as totally comprehensive, rigidly authoritarian, and yet capable of infinite development, without however any change in its dogmatic base. Every aspect of Jewish life, both individual and social, is covered, usually in considerable detail, with sanctions and punishments provided for every conceivable sin or infringement of the rules. The basic rules for every problem are stated dogmatically and cannot be questioned. What can be and is discussed at very great length is the elaboration and practical definition of these rules.” — [including the possible loopholes]

          “The following example illustrates…the level of absurdity reached by this system.” – [and he describes aspects of the prohibition against various kinds of work on the sabbath, one of which is harvesting; this led to a prohibition against breaking a branch off a tree; then, against riding a horse, because one might be tempted to break a branch as a whip.] “It is useless to argue that you have a ready-made whip, or that you intend to ride where there are no trees. What is forbidden remains forbidden for ever. It can, however, be stretched and made stricter; in modern times, riding a bicycle on the sabbath has been forbidden, because it is analogous to riding a horse.”

          [Such a strict system is a great way to control people---because no matter what you do, you are always in the wrong somehow, always having to atone for your transgressions.]

          Shahak continues with the changes in Jewish society from the ancient (Talmudic) times, ending around 500 AD, to the classic times, from around 800, when a great diaspora had occurred. Then he describes what was “in my opinion the most important method of adaptation, namely the dispensations.”

          “In the period of classical Judaism various talmudic laws became untenable for the Jewish ruling classes—the rabbis and the rich. In the interest of these ruling classes, a method of systematic deception was devised for keeping the letter of the law, while violating its spirit and intention.”

          And then he gives several examples. Here is one, involving the talmudic law that Jewish-owned land in Palestine must be left fallow every seventh (sabbatical) year, when agricultural work is forbidden. By the 1880s this was creating hardship for Jewish agricultural colonies in Palestine, and so “Rabbis sympathetic to the settlers helpfully devised a dispensation, which was later perfected by their successors in the religious zionist parties and has become an established Israeli practice.”

          You’re going to love this.

          “Shortly before a sabbatical year, the Israeli Minister of Internal Affairs gives the Chief Rabbi a document making him the legal owner of all Israeli land, both private and public. Armed with this paper, the Chief Rabbi goes to a non-Jew and sells him all the land of Israel (and, since 1967, the Occupied Territories) for a nominal sum. A separate document stipulates that the ‘buyer’ will ‘resell’ the land back after the year is over. And this transaction is repeated every seven years, usually with the same ‘buyer’.”

          “Non-zionist rabbis do not recognise the validity of this dispensation claiming correctly that, since religious law forbids Jews to sell land in Palestine to Gentiles, the whole transaction is based on a sin and hence null and void. The zionist rabbis reply, however, that what is forbidden is a real sale, not a fictitious one!”

  20. Thats a good idea to put up a talmud quote in your yard or sign.. Do it kind of like the demonrats do their talking points. every sign with the same quote.. Post it on the internet in large, printer friendly type so computer illiterates like me could just make copies and post them all over town!!! I’ll bet that would really make the mossad happy??

  21. Cassandra, perhaps people should know that since 1510 a Papal authorized version of Babylonian Talmud has been available. It is known as the Bomberg Talmud. Ask your local priest for a copy.

    • Good to know, since many different versions are available. Does anybody have any comment on the Bomberg Talmud?

  22. Yes, by all means do read the Talmud.
    You will learn how to have sex with 3 year old girls and boys.
    You will learn that killing a goyim is not a sin.
    A contract with a goyim is not binding to the jew.
    A jewish court must always favour the jew when the other party is a goyim, even if the jew is the guilty one.
    And why the jews must say the Kol Nidra prayer, in that they promise to God that they will not honor any contract or commitment made to a goy during this year.
    It will give you an insight to the real jewish life of fraud, cheating, hate of anyone who is not a jew, depravement, etc.
    Now I can hear the shouts: “anti-semite”, although I am just quoting their so beloved book.

    • Charlotte NC Bill

      Yup, Kevin Boyle put up quortes at his blog..www.noonetovotefor.com ? anyway he book speaks for itself..

  23. The Talmud twist is a dance I see in many responses. AR cite a lie in Shahak. Cite a line that is not a lie in the Talmud. (Hoffman’s “Judaism Discovered.”.
    Allow me to speak for many whom I do not know, but since I know my own heart, I am confident in this: The columnists and Duff are not the least antisemitic in the warped modern meaning of that propaganda term. We, they and me, are vehement in our opposition to the Zionists and their criminal behavior toward rest of humanity. Hagee is nuts for big bucks, An open debate will not be allowed by power structure, and Zionists obviously have usurped power in USA, Using it for evil. Hoffman’s latest revisionist newsletter is outstanding, July August issue. Sharp Jews that I have known, wish the blatant behavior and propaganda would cease.

    • Yep. The warped modern meeting of of term seems to be “Pissed off a Jew”

      Because the truth seems to piss off the Zionists, hence the pulling of the “A” card

  24. I just finished “Jewish History, Jewish Religion” last week. Excellent book.

    Two books that document the anti-Christian sections in the Talmud that I read and found useful are:
    http://www.amazon.com/Talmud-Unmasked-Rabbinical-Concerning-Christians/dp/1891396269/ref=pd_sim_b_4
    This book was written 100 years ago by a Catholic priest.

    http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Talmud-Peter-Schafer/dp/0691143188/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1314720478&sr=1-1
    This book was written in 2009 by a Princeton professor.

    I used to think Judaism was based on the Old Testament, which I read and understood. No, Judaism (except Karaite) is based on the Talmud and Kabala, and encourages tribalism, deception, and dispensations from law to allow for profit and the protection of the interests of the rich and powerful.

    I now understand why so many of my Jewish (by bloodline) friends do not practice Judaism, and why so many Jews are attracted to Buddhism and other philosophies and religions. There are many ugly things that naturally follow from Rabbinical Judaism.

    • Thanks for links jg, and for your comments. This is a hard thing to talk about.

    • I used to think this too. People still believe that the OT is the “Hebrew Bible” which is far removed from reality. The Jewish canon is different than the Christian canon for starters. The translation is also different and the meaning is different. But that’s nothing when you come to find out that Rabbinic Judaism is based off the vile Talmud. Rabbinic Judaism was created in the Diaspora post Christianity. It is erroneously considered older but it is a entirely different sect/cult than the old religion of Judah.

      That’s another thing. In the bible, the use of “Rabbi” refers to teacher and “Jew” refers to somebody from Judah such as Jesus (“The Lion’” of Judah). The “Jewish leaders” refer to the leaders of Judah. Jews did not killed Jesus. Not in the modern sense of the term.

      The famous “Synagogue of Satan” remarks again are referring to people who claim to follow the religion of Judah but do not because the religion has changed because of Christ. It is saying that real Jews are Christians (the ‘tribe’ and chosen one smugness expanded to all believers) and to beware the fake Jews, which are the non-believers. In other words, today’s Jews.

  25. “Thou shalt not make fun of Talmud,” Pastor John Hagee.

    I know Talmud is the most holy book in Judaism and worshipped by 65 million Evangelists – and even though Talmud has nothing but contempt for Christ, his mother Mary and the rest of Christianity – but Newsweek on December 29, 2010 had publish an article by Isaac Stone Fish in which he claimed that “Talmud is business guide for the Chinese business community”.

    I wonder why Duff choses such anti-Semitic articles while he has plenty of material bashing Qaddafi!!

    • Yes, Hagee is my favorite example of opportunistic hate-mongering posing as “Christianity”—an ardent zionist who avoided Vietnam service but is eager to wage bloody wars from the safety of the pulpit. I’d like to get a look at his Swiss bank account because I feel sure he has one.

      Wikipedia bio says he received an honorary doctorate from Israel’s Netanyahu Academic College in 2005. Enough said.

  26. oops, forgot to say, good on you cassabdra.

    • Thank you Tom.

      It’s a difficult subject. Those of us who believe in embracing all of humankind don’t know what to do with the Talmud. It’s like this bull-elephant in the living room that we’re supposed to ignore, but he’s making threatening noises. I don’t want pogroms against Jews, but I also don’t want pogroms against me.

      What to do? How will we live together? Can Jews who recognize the problem help us out here?

  27. When the contents of the Talmud were first exposed to the Catholic dominated Europe in the 12th century,
    the attitudes about Jews changed drastically. Read E. Michael Jones’ hefty history titled “The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, for details of the period. Michael Hoffman has produved the actual Talmud texts to illustrate the filthy nonsensical “opinion” of “learned” Rabbis( google Hoffman. Revision history. Shahak did world a big favor on this verboten topic; and, of course my favorite Douglas Reed, “Conspiracy of Zion.”
    Obviously, from these comments, gentiles also spew opinions. But these do not alter the word of God, as Talmudists do.

    • I have read part of Reed’s book, and look forward to getting back to it. He was a very highly regarded historian in his time until he began to write about the wrong things; then his career sank like a stone. Reed was not entirely unbiased; in particular I notice he over-idealizes Christians. But he had a wealth of knowledge and perspective, and his insights were thought-provoking, to say the very least.

      Because Reed was a non-Jew and non-Israeli, I have cited Shahak’s book instead, which is shorter and more narrowly focused. Shahak’s brilliant career as Israeli scholar and humanitarian activist was above reproach. He strongly believed that it was essential for Jews to face up to the aspects of their religion which were not a force for universal good, but were inherently racist and genocidal. He has persuaded me too.

  28. There has always been human resentment, hatred and jealousy of others who were more numerous, stronger, smarter, richer, more beautiful, etc. After the Judeans became divided into different religious and/or political sects that vied and competed with each other for the greater share of the Judean pie such as people, land, power, wealth, etc. and given that they were ruled over by pagan gentile Roman occupiers and conquerors at the time they began to hate the Romans and all other Judeans who were not of their group even to the point badly hating Judeans resulting in sectarian conflicts and disunity. Out of the disasters and losses of the revolts against Rome and the loss of the land of Judea, only two different groups survived and dealt differently with such losses. One was the Christians who believed in the universal brotherhood, reconciliation, peace and unity of mankind to heal this rift between Judeans (Jews) and non-Judeans (non-Jews) [generalism, universalism, communism?]. The other were the pharisees (rabbis) who believed in the brotherhood, reconciliation, peace and unity of Judeans (Jews) to heal the rift between Judeans (Jews) and other Judeans (Jews) [specificism, nationalism, fascism?]. Thus, both groups have been at odds on this and other issues and have disagreed about how to handle the loss of Judea such as forget and move on or remember and mourn.

  29. The two sections of the Talmud: Gemara (Commnetaries) and Mishna (Oral Tradition) are not ancient ,religious texts, but on-going and meant to facilitate the micromanagement of every aspect of human life, with a focus on depopulation and the eradication of the majority of mankind. This Cassandra could be a prophetess– remember the Cassandra Curse? Apollo married the Prophetess Cassandra, whom he latter cast out and put a curse on her, that no one would believe her prophecies. Sound familiar? Now, there are two curse-phrases that block the truth: “Conspiracy Theorist” and “Antisemitic”.

    • Cassandra is just my pen name wilson, chosen for the reasons you have identified. It’s hyperbolic I know, since I am not a prophetess; but I do relate to the mythical Cassandra’s problem with those who would not believe.

      • There are two Talmuds – the Jewish Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud. It’s the latter that is as cumbersome as an encyclopedia. I’ve read some of the Babylonian Talmud via the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, which Jews will tell you is a hoax. (But who can believe them?)

        Brother Nathanael Kapner, a former Jew, who now calls himself a Christian, (I have doubts about Catholics being bona-fide Christians) has insightful knowledge of both Torah and Talmud.
        His website: http://www.realzionistnews.com/?p=90

        Even some Jews are starting to fess up:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oqJH1KXlPs&feature=player_embedded
        (Calling someone anti-Semetic) IT’S A TRICK, WE ALWAYS USE IT says former ISRAEL MINISTER
        (Shulamit Aloni)

        “I know your tribulation and your poverty (but you are rich) and the slander of those who say that they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan.” Rev. 2:9

  30. It seems that Cassandra never read the Talmud in her life. It’s no surprise she recommends Israel Shahak’s book. This entire article is probably based on the lies written in it.

    • If Cassandra is methodologically relying on the Talmudic hermeneutic of the Torah, the Talmud means whatever she says it means, yes, maybe no?

      • @Dan

        Yes and no, Cassandra says the Torah is evil, hence the Talmud is evil because she methodologically relying on the Talmudic hermeneutic of the Torah, BUT who’s she to claim that the Torah is evil in the first place? Did she study the Torah by any chance?

        She writes: “Certain Christian evangelicals love to rail against the Koran, a book they’ve never read, as the source of all evil in the world.” How is she any different when it comes to the Torah?

        The only people who have the right to interpret scripture are the ones who study it for many years. Cassandra with her BA in psychology and an MSW degree doesn’t have the right to slander a book that is holy not only to the Jews but also to the Christians and the Muslims. Do you know how many stories where incorporated to the Koran from the Torah? If she has the nerve to call the Torah evil she might as well do the same to the Koran.

        • AR, I don’t know much about the Torah except that it incorporates much of the same material as the Christian Bible’s Old Testament. I couldn’t name the precise books that differ between the two but obviously there’s a lot of overlap because Christians and Jews share the same patriarchs and their stories. I have never read any of the Torah and was not expressing a beef about it I did point out that there is plenty of barbarity and genocide going on in the OT, which I know is true because I’ve read it. For that reason I do have a beef with the OT as a foundation for Christian doctrine. But that’s a different topic.

          You are right that my educational background in no way qualifies me as a religious scholar, I am qualified however to read what other scholars have written, as well as original sources, and draw my own conclusions. The text to which I object is startlingly straightforward.

          Your own qualifications to attack me are uncertain however, as you seem to have conflated Torah with Talmud in your criticism of my post. They are two very different works.

          I invite anyone here to post portions of the Koran which they find objectionable, as well as Torah or OT. But I hope AR that you will take up the task of answering my original question. If you find the controversial parts of the Talmud defensible, please explain so that we might better understand.

          • Cassandra, if I don’t misunderstand your statement “For that reason I do have a beef with the OT as a foundation for Christian doctrine”, then you may be aware already of the following literature, untampered by both the Church and jew-daics along the centuries, as found in Qumran after WW2. The Essene (Nazarene) scrolls.

            Yet, they are great reference for mystics, religionists, and especially churchians, misguided by jewish religious subversives who distorted the Bible under the hand of Scofield and Russell.

            Here is the whole package for Christians
            http://www.4shared.com/dir/y9bDA2PL/Essene.html

            And here is the entire collection on the original site
            http://www.thenazareneway.com/index.htm

            Strongly recommended, and very enlightening, this one. You will be surprised!
            http://www.thenazareneway.com/The Gospel of Paul.htm

          • Cassandra, if I don’t misunderstand your statement “For that reason I do have a beef with the OT as a foundation for Christian doctrine”, then you may be aware already of the following literature, untampered by both the Church and jew-daics along the centuries, as found in Qumran after WW2. The Essene (Nazarene) scrolls.

            Yet, they are great reference for mystics, religionists, and especially churchians, misguided by jewish religious subversives who distorted the Bible under the hand of Scofield and Russell.

            Here is the whole package for Christians
            http://www.4shared.com/dir/y9bDA2PL/Essene.html

            And here is the entire collection on the original site
            http://www.thenazareneway.com/index.htm

            And this is a most recommended file for all Christians. Surprise!
            http://www.thenazareneway.com/The Gospel of Paul.htm

          • Thanks Debalazo for Essene Scroll links etc. I’ll check them out.

          • @cassandra

            Given the fact that the text to which you object is startlingly straightforward, I can only regret that you Think of it as an exhaustive collection of technicalities allowing one to get around the law—with the notable addition of directives to persecute non-Jews, who are not considered human—and to do so as a religious duty.

            The Talmud does not consider gentiles to be sub-human, the Talmud prohibits killing gentiles, and the Talmud certainly does not permit sex with a three year old.

            If you noticed anything in the Talmud that you find objectionable, please provide me the exact quote and I’ll do my best to defend it (it seems to me you found plenty to go around).

            As someone with a BA in Middle Eastern studies I find nothing objectionable in the Koran. I find it fascinating.

          • addressing AR’s comment:

            “The Talmud does not consider gentiles to be sub-human, the Talmud prohibits killing gentiles, and the Talmud certainly does not permit sex with a three year old. If you noticed anything in the Talmud that you find objectionable, please provide me the exact quote and I’ll do my best to defend it (it seems to me you found plenty to go around). ”

            First let me ask you something AR: You do not believe these laws exist; you seem indignant at the mere suggestion. So may I assume that IF THEY DID exist, you would find them to be heinous and unacceptable? This would be a shocking thing to you?—and you would join me in condemning them?

            Answer this and I will continue.

          • @Cassandra

            These laws exist, the reason I’m indignant is because they are being depicted by some people as “blasphemy” or “anti-Christian”. I could be mistaken, and if I am, I will join you in condemning them.

          • Do you consider these objectionable AR? They answer your three points.

            “The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts…” -Saba Mecia 114, 6

            “It is the law to kill anyone who denies the Torah. The Christians belong to the denying ones of the Torah.” – Coschen hamischpat 425 Hagah 425. 5

            “A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated.” -9boda Sarah 37

            These are borrowed, with thanks, from Doug who posted them on the thread at mycatbirdseat.

          • @Cassandra

            I don’t find any of these objectionable.

            “The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts…” -Saba Mecia 114, 6
            It’s Bava Metzia not Saba Mecia. There’s no 114,6.

            This is the original passage:
            Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai said: The graves of gentiles do not cause ritual impurity in a dwelling as it says (Ezekiel 34:31) “Now, you [Israel] are My sheep , the sheep of My pasture, you are Man (Adam)…” You [Israel, the subject of the verse] are called Man (Adam) and gentiles are not called Man (Adam).

            This is the law if an ‘adam’ dies in a tent, anything that enters the tent or is already in the tent shall become impure for seven days” (Numbers 19:14). The words, “but beasts,” are a gross fabrication. The Talmud wants to know if the Hebrew word “adam” in the verse, which usually translates simply as “a man” is referring to both Jewish and Gentile men or perhaps only to Jewish men, and Gentile corpses would not impart ritual impurity. I can elaborate on this issue some more but I don’t see any reason to do so.

            I must add that this distortion that only Jews are human and not gentiles, runs contrary to a number of fundamental Jewish principles.

            Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Teshuvah 3:4 based on Tosefta Sanhedrin 13:1; Talmud Sanhedrin 105a
            “Righteous gentiles have a place in the world to come.”
            Jerusalem Talmud Peah 1:
            It says (Job 37:23): “With justice and an abundance of kindness, He does not deal harshly.” G-d does not withhold reward from gentiles who perform His commandments.
            Talmud Avot 3:14
            [Rabbi Akiva] would say: Beloved is man who was created in the divine image. An extra amount of love is given to him because he was created in the divine image as it says (Genesis 9:6) “For in the image of G-d He made man.”

            There’s more but you know where I’m going with this.

            “It is the law to kill anyone who denies the Torah. The Christians belong to the denying ones of the Torah.” – Coschen hamischpat 425 Hagah 425:5
            This is the passage:
            אבל [הגויים] שאין בינינו לבינם מלחמה ורועה בהמה דקה מישראל במקום שהשדות הם של ישראל, וכיוצא בהם, אין מסבבים להם המיתה, ואין [ואסור]

            This passage is an expression to the difference between pagan and monotheistic gentile cultures and it was grossly distorted. There’s absolutely NO call to kill anyone who denies the Torah.

            The rabbis of the Talmud meant by the term ‘idolaters’ the pagans who lived in their time, who worshipped the stars and the constellations and did not believe in the Exodus from Egypt and in the creation of the world out of nothing. But the nations under whose benevolent shadow we, the Jewish nation, are exiled and are dispersed among them, they do believe in the creation of the world out of nothing and the Exodus from Egypt and in the essentials of faith, and their whole intention is toward the Maker of heaven and earth, as other authorities have said . . . these nations do believe in all of this.

            “A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated.” -9boda Sarah 37
            It’s Aboda Sara 37a.

            This claim is ridiculous. It implies that Judaism permits pedophilia.

            The passage without distortions is as follows: “a Gentile girl three years of age, since an act on her would be considered true intercourse can also contract this impurity.”

            The Talmud is discussing certain laws of ritual impurity, their applications, and how they are contracted. The particular impurity under discussion can only be contracted by someone whom, as explained above has passed the minimum age, and were they to engage or be engaged in a sexual act, it would be considered according to the Halakha as such. As stated, for a female this is three years old. The Talmud says that even though many types of ritual impurity can only be contracted by Jews, this particular impurity can be contracted by anyone.

            If you have more quotes, feel free to post them but try to get the names of the sources right, it took me forever to find “Bava Metzia”.

          • I’m playing catch-up AR. Give me time and I’ll get back to you.

          • There IS a 114, 6 in Baba Mezi’a. Apparently the 6 refers to the footnote attached to that particular passage. Here’s where to find it:

            On the page at this link below, look for another link (under Seder Nezekin) to a PDF for Baba Mezi’a:
            http://www.halakhah.com/

            In the PDF, on page 404, you’ll see Baba Metzia 114b.
            In that first paragraph you’ll see:

            “…for it is written, And ye my flock, the flock of my pastures, are men; only ye are designated ‘men’.”

            That seems pretty straightforward to me. If only Jews are “men”, then everyone else is not. God created all the beasts of the earth and then he created Adam. Whether the actual word “beasts” appears in this particular translation is immaterial. If we aren’t “Adam”, then we are beasts. And the other texts you cite do not erase these words or their meaning. To say that Gentiles who are helpful to Jewish interests will reap their reward from God does not render them human.

            The fact that you denied there was a 114,6 does not help your argument.

          • Here’s your next argument AR:

            ————–

            “It is the law to kill anyone who denies the Torah. The Christians belong to the denying ones of the Torah.” – Coschen hamischpat 425 Hagah 425:5
            This is the passage:
            אבל [הגויים] שאין בינינו לבינם מלחמה ורועה בהמה דקה מישראל במקום שהשדות הם של ישראל, וכיוצא בהם, אין מסבבים להם המיתה, ואין [ואסור]

            This passage is an expression to the difference between pagan and monotheistic gentile cultures and it was grossly distorted. There’s absolutely NO call to kill anyone who denies the Torah.

            ————

            Although your inclusion of the Hebrew text is most impressive and authoritative-looking, the English portion of your argument is nonsensical. You ask us not to see what is in front of us, using a passage we can’t read.

          • And here, AR, is the third point of contention:

            “A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated.” -Aboda Sara 37a

            And your response:
            “This claim is ridiculous. It implies that Judaism permits pedophilia. ”

            And your elaboration:
            “The Talmud is discussing certain laws of ritual impurity, their applications, and how they are contracted. The particular impurity under discussion can only be contracted by someone whom, as explained above has passed the minimum age, and were they to engage or be engaged in a sexual act, it would be considered according to the Halakha as such. As stated, for a female this is three years old. The Talmud says that even though many types of ritual impurity can only be contracted by Jews, this particular impurity can be contracted by anyone.”

            How incredibly disingenuous of you, all this talk about ritual impurity as if the offensive parts weren’t there. Did you think I was incapable of checking on your claim? Or that I wouldn’t bother?

            The passages below begin with Niddah 44b, and go on in horrifying detail for page after page of jaw-dropping child abuse:

            “A GIRL OF THE AGE OF THREE YEARS AND ONE DAY MAY BE BETROTHED BY INTERCOURSE; THE GUILT OF ADULTERY MAY BE INCURRED THROUGH HER.”

            (And if that wasn’t bad enough….)

            “IF ONE WAS YOUNGER THAN THIS AGE, INTERCOURSE WITH HER IS LIKE PUTTING A FINGER IN THE EYE.” – [in other words, it's of no consequence; no lasting harm]

            “Does not this then teach us that as the eye tears and tears again so do the features of virginity disappear and reappear again.”

            http://www.halakhah.com/niddah/niddah_44.html#PARTb

            How about it AR?—Does this sound like pedophilia yet? And are you ready to keep your promise to join me in condemning these three outrages?—-Or will you suddenly grow quiet?

            Passages like this do not belong in the sacred text of any modern religion. The idea that today’s Orthodox Jews study, discuss, and believe this crap is simply unacceptable and dangerous.

          • @Cassandra

            I said I could elaborate on that issue and I see now that I have no choice but to do so.

            The fact that there is a 114,6 is irrelevant to this discussion but the fact that you took upon yourself to present me with a distorted passage in the first place and only after I proved you it was distorted, managed to find the correct passage from a credible source does not help your argument.

            This is the passage in Hebrew and the English translation is correct:
            “ר”ש בר יוחאי אומר קברי עובדי כוכבים אינן מטמאין באהל שנא’ ואתן צאני צאן מרעיתי אדם אתם קרויין אדם ואין העובדי כוכבים קרויין אדם.”

            Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai said: The graves of gentiles do not cause ritual impurity in a dwelling as it says (Ezekiel 34:31) “Now, you [Israel] are My sheep , the sheep of My pasture, you are Man (Adam)…” You [Israel, the subject of the verse] are called Man (Adam) and gentiles are not called Man (Adam).

            אדם(Adam) in Hebrew is man (singular). There is a discussion among scholars in which אדם can refer to all men therefore “R. Simeon b. Yohai said: The graves of Gentiles do not defile, for it is written, And ye my flock, the flock of my pastures, are men; only ye are designated ‘men.” is a correct translation as well.
            To elaborate on this issue (like I said I would) you can check the following passage:
            Talmud Gittin 47a
            “יש קנין לעובד כוכבים בא”י לחפור בה שיחין ומערות שנאמר השמים שמים לה’ והארץ נתן לבני אדם.”

            “A gentile has the ability to purchase land in Israel in order to dig holes and caves as it says (Psalms 115:16) “As for the heavens, the heavens are the Lord’s; but the earth He has given to mankind (Bnei Adam=sons of Adam).”

            בני אדם=Bnei Adam=sons of Adam=sons of man=mankind.

            As you can see from Gittin the Talmud considers the phrase Bnei Adam (sons of man) to refer also to gentiles. Clearly, gentiles are considered human.

            I can only conclude that your understanding that the Talmud in Bava Metzia considers gentiles to be sub human comes from superficial reading which I’m afraid leads to superficial understanding, the kind that leads you to believe that Jews are allowed to have sex with a 3 year old child.

            As for the second argument: I apologize, I didn’t check this source thoroughly.
            “It is the law to kill anyone who denies the Torah. The Christians belong to the denying ones of the Torah.” – Coschen hamischpat 425 Hagah 425:5

            The Source is Shulchan Aruch: Coschen Mischpat 425:5.

            Shulchan Aruch is not the Talmud, it’s sort of a Summarization of the laws in the Torah and Talmud and is the Code of Jewish Law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shulchan_Aruch
            It has 4 Turim (Arba’ah Turim) which Coschen Mischpat is one of them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arba%27ah_Turim

            The reason I can’t provide an English translation to this passage is because, as far as I know, there’s only a partial English translation to Shulchan Aruch. http://www.shulchanarach.com/
            Coschen Mischpat isn’t translated to English online at all. I invite you prove me wrong and I do hope you will. Coschen Mischpat is translated to English in this book. http://www.judaism.com/display.asp?nt=&etn=JAHBF

            However the interpretation to this passage is given by R. Moses Rivkes here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/20065780/Rabbi-Jonathan-Sacks-Dignity-of-Difference-Sources-in-Traditional-Jewish-Literature
            You will find it at the bottom of page 27 and at the top of page 88 alongside the Hebrew interpretation.

            I will say this again, this passage is grossly distorted if not entirely, the words “Torah” (תורה), “Kill” (הרג) and “Christians” (נוצרים) do not appear in this passage at all!

          • I will reply to your post on Monday.

          • @Cassandra
            “A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated.” -Aboda Sara 37a

            I stand behind what I said. This passage was distorted and by no means implies that it’s ok to have sex with a 3 year old child. I provided an elaborated interpretation and you didn’t refute it at all, you called it disingenuous and just moved on and provided a different quote from a credible source – Something you should have done in the first place instead of borrowing distorted/fabricated quotes from Doug (He probably borrowed them from stormfront or Ted Pike).

            As for the new passage you provided, it presents a bit of a challenge I’ll say. When I read it like you do all I can say is that it’s nauseating. I’m disgusted by it and I’m sure you’re disgusted as well and I’m truly sorry, BUT, And now comes the annoying part, The problem with first reading is that passages like this one are always taken out of context. The Talmud is only discussing ex post facto – what would happen if such a case arose. These passages certainly do not address everyday occurrences but unfortunate situations that arise for which rulings must be made. Another problem comes with translating these passages. the word for cohabitation in the original Hebrew and/or Aramaic does not always imply intercourse, but simply means being secluded long enough for the act to commence with intent. Therefore, what comes out of these discussions in the Talmud is that a man must take special care not to seclude himself with a (not closely related) female, even as young as three years and a day, to avoid any perceptions of either inappropriate behavior or of a marital relationship that doesn’t exist. The consequences can be devastating.
            If you think to yourself, OMG you must not leave a Jew with a 3 year old child in a room because he won’t be able to control his urges, you’ll be mistaken. Orthodox Jews according to the Talmud must keep themselves separated from women as much as possible. They follow these strict sets of laws that you and I will never understand. Why? Two words: Yetzer hara http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yetzer_hara

            Whether you like it or not Cassandra this is the Talmudic method of discussion, and the use of language (extreme example, analogies, metaphors, etc.), I could respect your sense of morals (even if it’s a false one) and your objection to the extreme/absurd examples given to make a point. I admit people who are ignorant of the Talmudic method and read such passages superficially could be offended. They merely do not understand what is being discussed. That’s why I cannot condemn a passage simply on the basis of superficial reading.

            “Passages like this do not belong in the sacred text of any modern religion. The idea that today’s Orthodox Jews study, discuss, and believe this crap is simply unacceptable and dangerous.”
            1. Judaism is not a Modern religion according to orthodox Jews. The second part of this paragraph contradicts the first one. If you wish to find modernity in Judaism, Reform Judaism or Conservative Judaism is your address.
            2. You cannot expect that these passages will be removed/deleted from Jewish study just because you fill offended by them at first reading. That’s absurd.

          • AR
            I personally resist all attempts to attack religions because of the ignorant shit the “holy books” are filled with
            I read the bible, king james version, first time when I was 8…thought it was one of the dumbest things i ever saw
            my dad got me a koran then, translation..as i remember, mohammed marmaduke pictall…
            he liked it, though a communist
            i was unconvinced
            my mother gave up on jews as totally nuts and tried jehovah witnesses
            in the end…i share religious beliefs with the majority of french
            i visit churches all the time, take photographs, light candles…even visit mosques
            i enjoy religious architecture
            not religion

          • Gordon

            I do not enjoy religion either.

          • OK AR, I’m back.

            You said:
            ” The fact that there is a 114,6 is irrelevant to this discussion”

            No it’s not. You told me there is no 114,6 in Bava Metzi’a, and also that I spelled it wrong—apparently in an effort to overwhelm the discussion with your superior knowledge of Talmud. Why would you tell me it wasn’t there, when you knew it was? You offer no explanation or apology for that. And you persist in calling it a “distorted passage” when it’s not. It’s simply a different translation of the same idea. Your elaboration on the topic hasn’t changed that: the corpses of goyim do not cause ritual impurity because they are not sons of Adam.

            Now as to Talmud Gittin 47a:
            You cited this:
            “A gentile has the ability to purchase land in Israel in order to dig holes and caves as it says (Psalms 115:16) “As for the heavens, the heavens are the Lord’s; but the earth He has given to mankind (Bnei Adam=sons of Adam).”

            Psalm 115 is all about how the goyim are foolish pagans but Yahweh has given the earth to Israel, the sons of Adam. And this entire Talmud tractate involves the distinction between Israelites and goyim in the law: Can land be sold to them entirely? Can it thus be released from the obligation to tithe? (Generally no, because well-timed “sales” of land to goyim could be used by Israelites to avoid the tithe.)

            The digging of holes is a very slim argument to hang your point on, against all the many other places where it is clear that goyim are different, and less than, sons of Adam.

            And regarding directives to kill non-believers:
            Citing a later and more tolerant commentary on this topic (as you have done) doesn’t erase the earlier words or the intervening ones. Rivkes expressed his own opinion about who should be considered an idolator; Maimonides and others had quite a different opinion.

            See:
            A List of Some Problematic Issues Concerning Orthodox Jewish Belief – (#95-96, the status of non-Jews & Secular Jews)
            http://www.talkreason.org/articles/list.cfm

            Now as to the “sex with a 3 year old” issue:
            Nauseated are you? But surely you’ve heard these passages before, if you’re as knowledgeable about Talmud literature as you seem. All I can say is, I had to laugh at your explanation. You characterize these as unheard-of “unfortunate situations” for which rulings have been made just in case they should ever arise. But if the good rabbis felt the same way you and I do about such “unfortunate situations”, it’s surprising they wouldn’t have rained down their denunciations on such behavior, called it an abomination and laid out severe penalties. But far from doing so, they even shrug it off as harmless if the violation happens before the age of 3 years and one day. This isn’t a case of mistranslation and you know it. There is no ambiguity here, no metaphor, no mistake of “superficial reading”. The argument that a toddler’s hymen can re-grow does not speak merely of “a perception of inappropriate behavior that doesn’t exist”. But I will give you credit for your creativity and skill at word games.

            You said:
            “You cannot expect that these passages will be removed/deleted from Jewish study just because you feel offended by them at first reading. That’s absurd.”

            Maybe I AM being absurd. I think the matter should be evaluated by the non-Jewish public, after they get a look at what’s in the Talmud literature. That’s why I wrote this commentary. It’s not up to me or my fellow non-Jews to change what’s there. It’s up to Jews themselves to recognize the problem and demand changes, if they want acceptance by others. Enough of the pity party already.

        • “The only people who have the right to interpret scripture are the ones who study it for many years.”

          In which country? Under which regime? Which Epoch? Being the Talmud a non-Mystical writing, but gross abuses of a language and of people (humans of the world), and since it was jews who translated it to English, plain English, by the way, anyone can, and do, understand the evil, hateful, and malicious message of at least a condemnable portion of its controversial contents..

          Nothing symbolical, nothing ‘occult’, nor mystical, allegorical, spiritual, or psychic. Gross primitive literature by primitive beings, Deviants, to say the least. And you say “holy to Ch & M”?? Spare us, that book was burned by the Church many times, countless books, since the Church discovered its contents, and if not mistaken, it also burned the owners. AR, you don’t make as apologist for the Talmud. No one can.

        • Charlotte NC Bill

          The damn Talmud is objectively evil and exremely ethno-supremacist…One only has to read it which is why Gentiles are called ” anti-semitic” if they quote fm that wicked book…Based on even a casual reading of the Talmud one would have to conclude that post Holy Thursday ( when the Pharisees had Jesus arrested, beaten, tried Him in a kangaroo court, kept Him chained all night before marching Him over to Pilate the next morning DEMANDING that He be executed…Jesus the Prince of Peace and Son of God…when someone counts Him as an enemy you can expect ANYTHING fm them ) Judaism is just tribal self-worship and hatred of all others…

    • AR…if you want to bring in the issue of duplicity, you have to start with the two versions of the Talmud. The expose writing on this came out long before Shahak, going back to the turn of the century. He did not discover anything in his book. He was just putting the earlier work out, none of which I have ever seen a single word refuting. The material was not widely distributed back then and was just left to die on the vine…until google books came along and internet book reviews of rare material. God Bless Al Gore for inventing the Internet.

      My experience personally of presenting the two Talmud story to Jewish friends is that they are surprised that you know, as they always are of your being familiar with any Jewish sources…even the Israeli news. But they give up the ghost on the spot as they don’t want to embarass themselves with trying to con you that the sun rises in the west.

      The first time I had one here at the house and showed him my Judacia library, after he picked his jaw up off the floor…to my surprise…he asked me how much I wanted for it. He wanted to buy the whole thing…as if I had put the collection tegether just to ‘flip it’. He obviously did not want me to ‘continue’ having them.

      And then he asked me the usual questions about why I was focusing such an effort to study Jews, Israel, and Judacia…like it as all espionage research, reading autobiographies, diaries, early Zionist writings fron the late 1800′s, etc. from Jewish sources. He zoomed in the Herzl diaries. Why did I buy that? Answer, to learn he was a nut…he posed to the Pope that he would convert all the Jews to Christians if he would support a Jewish state. His jaw dropped on the floor again.

      And I told him that it was so that I would be better able to defend myself in the future. He had no response…but asked me to promise that if I ever did want to sell them to give him first shot..even asking me who would be handling my estate….really weird…but then again, not.

      • @Jim
        “He obviously did not want me to ‘continue’ having them.”
        That’s a bold assumption on your behalf, I must say.

        “…to learn he was a nut…he posed to the Pope that he would convert all the Jews to Christians if he would support a Jewish state.”
        Come on, you took a scribble from Herzl’s diary and turned it into a conspiracy theory.
        I cannot believe you’re holding on to this in order to vilify the man.

        Herzl didn’t take everything he wrote in his diary seriously, and he obviously changed his mind about it. Why? Because he only wrote it (if I’m not mistaken) once. How do I know he changed his mind about it? Simple, Just review his life’s work until the day he died.

        Did Herzl give a speech in the World Zionist Congress where he claimed that all Jews must convert to Christianity? If so provide a quote.

        Did he repeat this claim even once in meetings or events he attended? If so provide a quote.

        During his meeting with the pope, did Herzl repeat this claim in the pope’s ears? If so provide a quote.

        In the books and articles he wrote, did he ever mention the need to convert Jews to Christianity? If so provide a quote.

        Here’s another question: Why establish a state for Jews and convert them all to Christianity in a Jewish state? Wouldn’t it be easier to convert them all in Europe?

        The fact is Herzl was a secular Jew who took no interest in Christianity whatsoever, in fact he wanted all Jews to become secular (that’s why his eminent opposers were orthodox Jews), and you will find that in many of his writings.

        • AR, even from a distance, it seems like ‘Jim’ has been around typical jews. I can’t see any discrepancy with what he claims, unless, I were one of the targeted for exposure.

          “he posed to the Pope that he would…” Anything wrong with that? Who can believe or trust a jew? Nicola Tesla didn’t! He was mishandled and robbed of his inventions by them! Now, probably the Pope did believe Herzl was sincere (cough-cough!) and swallowed the hook, fishing rod and everything with it included. Aren’t Talmudic jews supposed to LIE outright to dumb, cow-like goys? And their god (or the rabbis who beat him?) will reward them and praise them for it?

          Your devotion and fervor for such an aberrant “religious” document (seas of excrement – child rape – lying is a virtue – Mary was a prostitute – ad nauseam), only qualifies you as an irrational fanatic of irrational jew-daic vilification of Humanity.

        • AR, This article has done more than enlist retorts, but has listed retorts much like Martin Luther gathered when the Babylonian Talmud was read to him by a jewish convert long ago. That is where a new uprising of …..not anti-semitism, but anti-asshole reared it’s head once again. There are two books, one for them, and one for whitey. If you have a copy of the Palestianian Talmud, I suggest you go out and try to obtain the one she’s really talking about. I’m sure if you get Mr. Foxman on the phone, or Sandra Day Oconnor they could provide you with one. But, I’m sure you know what’s in there don’t you AR?

      • Extremely interesting comment Jim.

    • I don’t claim to be a Talmud scholar AR, far from it. But I have read enough to get a sense of the thing, enough to pose the question, Is it defensible? Apparently you feel it is.

      Maybe you are just the one to offer a defense here, for our enlightenment.

      • @Cassandra

        I can try and offer a defence as best as I can, so if you have any questions Ill do my best to answer them.

        I can also recommend on a book that might enlighten you a bit.

        http://www.archive.org/details/judaismandthekor012707mbp

        • I have already asked my question, AR.

          I don’t own the book you’re recommending and I don’t see its relevance to this discussion. Since you’ve read it, can you tell us?

      • Charlotte NC Bill

        You don’t have to be…this is the damn internet…damning quotes fm the Talmud which show a contempt for all non-Jews are easy to find..Gentile women are “sacks of excrement”..It’s permissible to have relations with a 3 yr old since ” at the age it is like the tearing of an eye…”…”If a gentile falls into a hole you shouldn’t help him out..”…Damn the Talmud is so evil it makes it easy to believe the authenticity of the Protocols..The Protocols just put the anti-gentile, desire to dominate which is clearly in the Talmud, into practice!

        • Yes, and to quote Henry Ford, “If the Protocols is a fabrication, why is it so accurate?” And it is, all the time.

    • AR, the priest Pranaitis was murdered (by Muslims, of course) after he disclosed in writing the filth (your “lies”) within the nonsensical, egoflatulent, and grossly anti-Christian Talmudic “religious” garbage.

      Since childhood in elementary school (outside the USA), I always remembered a picture of “Savonarola burning books”. The depiction didn’t specify which books or what content, and it impressed me since we cared for our books that our parents had to buy with a sacrifice, since our government was not socialized (communized) then to hand out, and control, what we read in class.

      It took me many years, actually after the criminal act of 911 by Mossad and the traitors in the DC Latrine (Washington), to discover that Savonarola, of many others and many other occassions by the Church, was burning the devious, nefast, blasphemous Talmud. Heaps of them. Good.

    • ‘AR’ accuses Cassandra of having never read the Talmud. If you search for the Talmud on Amazon, you find there has not been a consistent effort to make it available to anyone interested, unlike the Koran or the Bible.

Comments are closed

 

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Join Our Daily Newsletter
  View Newsletter ARCHIVE

WHAT'S HOT

  1. NEO – USA in Mid East – Going, Going, Gone
  2. Israel Wants Temple Mount Control
  3. Top 10 Veterans Stories in Today’s News – April 24, 2014
  4. Veterans – They Wait, They Die
  5. Secret Veterans Death List Discovered
  6. Missing Plane Mystery Solved?
  7. Ukraine Charade on Parade and Psyops, too
  8. NEO – Gang in a Ballot Box – a Safe Haven for Misha’s Alumni?
  9. Is the President Being Blackmailed?
  10. Lavrov Condemns Kiev’s Instant Breech of Agreement
  11. Veterans Push To Test Marijuana As a Life-Saving Treatment for Crippling PTSD
  12. US Threatens Russia
  13. Top 10 Veterans Stories in Today’s News – April 23, 2014
  14. Obama Administration Launches Online Veterans Employment Center
  15. Meet Dave, Your Christian ‘Dyno-Rod’
  16. Press TV – Who Wins the Battle over Ukraine ?
  17. “Gitmo unconstitutional result of 9/11 false flag”
  18. Soap Stories, Gas Chambers, and the Magic Number (Part VII)
  19. NEO – Saudi Arabia: Preparations for Regime Change
  20. Prophet or Profit? Nikola Tesla’s Vision vs J.P. Morgan’s Greed
  1. ani: On my parents' television at the moment is live broadcast of the ANZAC parade with the Duke of Cambridge taking the salute from the survivors of every conflict with which ...
  2. rolan: Continuing here (where I have started it); there is no mentioning of it (if I am not mistaken) but I am pretty sure that while the first *gentleman* Russian Su-24 which ...
  3. Jack Heart: Thank you stephan for pointing that picture out. Hilarious
  4. s.s.: The media and all the players are getting climax points in all places at once...then they can murder many and use the media to say poor jews are getting clobbered......give ...
  5. s.s.: How sad you'd have an official vote on something like that. Read the Protocols of Zion folks. It covers just about everything. I still didn't see ...

Veterans Today Poll

When will the New World Order One World Government officially be announced?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Archives