I cannot help but reject the faith of my mother's Jewish ancestors because nothing I've read in Jewish scriptures and in Jewish actions following those scriptures in modern Israel leads me to believe otherwise.
The racism is blanket racism, like white supremacy is blanket racism against all non-white people Judaism is blanket racism against all non-Jews.
There has been a concerted attempt in our times to cover over this racism by pointing to Falasha Jews for example and token Gentile converts but the actions of Israeli Jews towards Arab Palestinians shows the inherent racist ideology of Judaism. This is the major reason I refuse to identify with the Jewish religion as I will only work for the God of all people, not a special god for Jews only.
What do other Jews think of Israel's ethnic cleansing program to rid as many Palestinians from Palestine as possible and to make the lives of those who remain as miserable as possible?
Judaism is based on racism
Moderator: Moderators
-
cnorman18
Re: Administrators.
Post #21It would be easy to post what you like, prove your point, and not be censured or censored in any way.biomystic wrote:Well, I was wondering how long it would take to stop debate on this issue and of course we are not allowed to talk about it now with any honesty lest we offend a particular religious group no matter what their beliefs are. In other words, we are asked not to make the logical conclusion that a racist religion inspires bigotry. I'm sorry to make intellectual honesty more important than catering to prejudiced peoples but that's me. Ban me for it. You will only show your lack of respect for truthful expression by your members. If I post this where you demand I do you will bury it and go on as if you can get away with this type of intellectual repression. So my complaint is posted here for all to read.
Just find some material, from Jewish sources, that PROVES that Jews teach hatred of or discrimination against Gentiles, and/or that our beliefs include the teaching that Gentiles are somehow or other inferior to Jews.
Go ahead; let's see what you've got. The answer is "nothing."
Post #22
Jewish Talmudic Quotes - Facts Are Facts
From Acharya S
7-26-9
Note: This is from the historian who's work inspired "Zeigeist" film. She is one of the most thorough of researchers and her studies of the Talmud cannot be defamed as "anti-semitic" as those protecting Judaism so often use as a means to stop free inquiry into this religion.
Talmudic Quotes
The decisions of the Talmud are words of the living God. Jehovah himself asks the opinions of earthly rabbis when there are difficult affairs in heaven.
Rabbi Menachen, Comments for the Fifth Book
Jehovah himself in heaven studies the Talmud, standing: he has such respect for that book.
Tractate Mechilla/Me'ilah
R. Johanan said: A heathen who studies the Torah deserves death, for it is written, Moses commanded us a law for an inheritance; it is our inheritance, not theirs. Then why is this not included in the Noachian laws? -- On the reading morasha [an inheritance] he steals it; on the reading me'orasah [betrothed], he is guilty as one who violates a betrothed maiden, who is stoned. An objection is raised: R. Meir used to say. Whence do we know that even a heathen who studies the Torah is as a High Priest? From the verse, [Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments:] which, if man do, he shall live in them. Priests, Levites, and Israelites are not mentioned, but men: hence thou mayest learn that even a heathen who studies the Torah is as a High Priest! -- That refers to their own seven laws.
Sanhedrin 59a
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
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 Dia 17
We beg Thee, O Lord, indict Thy wrath on the nations not believing in Thee, and not calling on Thy name. Let down Thy wrath on them and inflict them with Thy wrath. Drive them away in Thy wrath and crush them into pieces. Take away, O Lord, all bone from them. In a moment indict all disbelievers. Destroy in a moment all foes of Thy nation. Draw out with the root, disperse and ruin unworthy nations. Destroy them! Destroy them immediately, in this very moment!
Prayer said on the eve of Passover (Pranajtis: Christianus in Talmudae Judeorum, quotations from: Synagoga Judaica)
The Feast of Tabernacles is the period when Israel triumphs over the other people of the world. That is why during this feast we seize the loulab and carry it as a trophy to show that we have conquered all other peoples, known as "populace"...
Zohar, Toldoth Noah 63b
When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves.
Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D
Resh Lakish said: He who is observant of fringes will be privileged to be served by two thousand eight hundred slaves, for it is said, Thus saith the Lord of hosts: In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold, out of all the languages of the nations shall even take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you, etc.
Mas. Shabbath 31b
On the house of the Goy [Goy means unclean, and is the disparaging term for a non-Jew] one looks as on the fold of cattle.
Tosefta, Tractate Erubin VIII
When a Jew has a Gentile in his clutches, another Jew may go to the same Gentile, lend him money and in turn deceive him, so that the Gentile shall be ruined. For the property of a Gentile, according to our law, belongs to no one, and the first Jew that passes has full right to seize it.
Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 156
If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth.
Choschen Hamm 388, 15
Happy will be the lost of Israel, whom the Holy One, blessed be He, has chosen from amongst the Goyim, of whom the Scriptures say: "Their work is but vanity, it is an illusion at which we must laugh; they will all perish when God visits them in His wrath." At the moment when the Holy One, blessed be He, will exterminate all the Goyim of the world, Israel alone will subsist, even as it is written: "The Lord alone will appear great on that day!...
Zohar, Vayshlah 177b
That the Jewish nation is the only nation selected by God, while all the remaining ones are contemptible and hateful.
That 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.
A Jew may rob a Goy, he may cheat him over a bill, which should not be perceived by him, otherwise the name of God would become dishonoured.
Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat, 348
R. Hanina said: If a heathen smites a Jew, he is worthy of death; for it is written, And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian. [Ex. 2:12] R. Hanina also said: He who smites an Israelite on the jaw, is as though he had thus assaulted the Divine Presence; for it is written, one who smiteth man [i.e. an Israelite] attacketh the Holy One.
Sanhedrin 58b
[In other words, if a non-Jew kills a Jew, the non-Jew can be killed. Punching an Israelite is akin to assaulting God. (But killing a non-Jew is NOT like assaulting God.]
If a goy killed a goy or a Jew he is responsible, but if a Jew killed a goy he is not responsible.
Tosefta, Aboda Zara, VIII, 5
Has it not been taught: "With respect to robbery -- if one stole or robbed or [seized] a beautiful woman, or [committed] similar offences, if [these were perpetrated] by one Cuthean ["Cuthean" or "Samaritan" = goy/gentile/heathen/non-Jew] against another, [the theft, etc.] must not be kept, and likewise [the theft] of an Israelite by a Cuthean, but that of a Cuthean by an Israelite may be retained?" But if robbery is a capital offence, should not the Tanna have taught: He incurs a penalty? -- Because the second clause wishes to state, "but that of a Cuthean by an Israelite may be retained," therefore the former clause reads, "[theft of an Israelite by a Cuthean] must not be kept." But where a penalty is incurred, it is explicitly stated, for the commencing clause teaches: "For murder, whether of a Cuthean by a Cuthean, or of an Israelite by a Cuthean, punishment is incurred; but of a Cuthean by an Israelite, there is no death penalty?"
Sanhedrin 57a
[Translation: A Jew may rob a Goy, but a Goy may not rob a Jew. If a Goy murders another Goy or a Jew, he should be killed, but a Jew will not be incur the death penalty for killing a non-Jew.]
Kill the Goyim by any means possible.
Choshen Ha'mishpat 425:50
Everyone who sheds the blood of the impious [non-Jews] is as acceptable to God as he who offers a sacrifice to God.
Yalkut 245c
Extermination of the Christians is a necessary sacrifice.
Zohar, Shemoth
Tob shebbe goyyim harog - Even the best of the Goyim (Gentiles) should be killed.
Soferim 15, Rule 10
[NB: Hoffman says, "This passage is not from the Soncino edition but is from the original Hebrew of the Babylonian Talmud as quoted by the 1907 Jewish Encyclopedia, published by Funk and Wagnalls and compiled by Isidore Singer, under the entry, 'Gentile,' (p. 617)." Another source says this passage is at Avodah Zara 26b. We have not been able to verify any of these references. It does not seem to be at Avodah Zara 26b of the Soncino edition.]
What is [the meaning of] Mount Sinai? The mountain whereon there descended hostility [sin'ah ] toward idolaters [non-Jews].
Shabbath 89a
The same has been taught as follows: If the ox of an Israelite gores an ox of a Canaanite [non-Jew] there is no liability, but if an ox of a Canaanite gores an ox of an Israelite... the payment is to be in full, as it is said: He stood and measured the earth, he beheld and drove asunder the nations [Gentiles], and again, He shined forth from Mount Paran...implying that from Paran he exposed their money to Israel.
Baba Kama 38a
[Trans: The property of the Israelite is more valuable than that of the Gentile. Mount Paran refers to Deut. 33:2, where God offered the law to the nations (Gentiles), who rejected it. The money of the Gentiles is available to the Israelites.]
ONE SHOULD NOT PLACE CATTLE IN HEATHENS' INNS, BECAUSE THEY ARE SUSPECTED OF IMMORAL PRACTICE WITH THEM. A WOMAN SHOULD NOT BE ALONE WITH THEM, BECAUSE THEY ARE SUSPECTED OF LEWDNESS, NOR SHOULD A MAN BE ALONE WITH THEM, BECAUSE THEY ARE SUSPECTED OF SHEDDING BLOOD. . .
Why then should we not leave female animals alone with female heathens? -- Said Mar 'Ukba b. Hama: Because heathens frequent their neighbours' wives, and should one by chance not find her in, and find the cattle there, he might use it immorally. You may also say that even if he should find her in he might use the animal, as a Master has said: Heathens prefer the cattle of Israelites to their own wives, for R. Johanan said: When the serpent came unto Eve he infused filthy lust into her.
Avodah Zarah 22a-b
He who pours the oil of anointing over cattle or vessels is not guilty; if over heathens or the dead, he is not guilty. The law relating to cattle and vessels is right, for it is written: Upon the flesh of man [adam] shall it not be poured; and cattle and vessels are not man. Also with regard to the dead, [it is plausible] that he is exempt, since after death one is called corpse and not man. But why is one exempt in the case of heathens; are they not in the category of adam?-No, it is written: And ye my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, are adam [man]: Ye are called adam but heathens are not called 'adam. But is it not written: And the persons [adam] were sixteen thousand? -- Because it is used in opposition to cattle. But is it not written: And should I not have pity on Nineveh [that great city, wherein are more than six score thousand persons [adam]?--This too is used in opposition to cattle.
Mas. K'rithoth 6b
[This passage refers to anointing with oil. "Heathens," i.e., Gentiles, are not "adam" or man but are equated with cattle]
An objection was raised: And the persons were sixteen thousand!--This is due to [the mention of] cattle. Wherein are more than six-score thousand persons that cannot discern between their right and their left hand!--This is due [to the mention of] cattle.
Mas. Yevamoth 61b
[Again non-Jews are referred to as "cattle."]
All Israelites will have a part in the future world... The Goyim, at the end of the world will be handed over to the angel Duma and sent down to hell.
Zohar, Shemoth, Toldoth Noah, Lekh-Lekha
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
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 Chaim 14, 20, 32, 33, 39
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 Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348
A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl.
Gad. Shas. 2:2
A boy-goy after nine years and one day old, and a girl after three years and one day old, are considered filthy.
Pereferkowicz, Talmud t.v., p. 11
Raba stated: With reference to the Rabbinical statement that [legally] an Egyptian [Gentile] has no father, it must not be imagined that this is due to [the Egyptians'] excessive indulgence in carnal gratification, owing to which it is not known [who the father was], but that if this were known it is to be taken into consideration; but [the fact is] that even if this is known it is not taken into consideration.... Thus it may be inferred that the All Merciful declared their children to be legally fatherless, for [so indeed it is also] written, Whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses.
Yevamoth 98a
[Trans.: A non-Jew is "legally fatherless," regardless of whether or not the father is known. Gentile children are essentially asses and horses, i.e., animals.]
[The daughters of the heathens] should be considered as in the state of <http://jewish.com/askarabbi/askarabbi/a ... htm>niddah [separation?] from their cradle...
Avodah Zarah 36b
They decreed in connection with a heathen child that it should cause defilement by seminal emission so that an Israelite child should not become accustomed to commit pederasty with him.... It is therefore to be concluded that a heathen girl [communicates defilement] from the age of three years and one day, for inasmuch as she is then capable of the sexual act she likewise defiles by a flux. This is obvious!
Avodah Zarah 36b-37a
R. Joseph said: Come and hear! A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition [intercourse], and if her deceased husband's brother cohabits with her, she becomes his. The penalty of adultery may be incurred through her; [if a niddah] she defiles him who has connection with her, so that he in turn defiles that upon which he lies, as a garment which has lain upon [a person afflicted with gonorrhoea].
Sanhedrin 55b
Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Pederasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that.24 (24) I.e., Rab makes nine years the minimum; but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age, no guilt is incurred. Samuel makes three the minimum.
Sanhedrin 54b
Raba said. It means this: When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this [three years old], it is as if one puts the finger into the eye; but when a small boy has intercourse with a grown-up woman he makes her as 'a girl who is injured by a piece of wood.'...
Kethuboth 11b
[This debate concerns whether or not someone is a virgin. Virginity is prized above all, such that it is believed that a girl under the age of three will regain her virginity, even if a man has had intercourse with her. (Fn. 7 says, in regard to putting "the finger into the eye": "I.e., tears come to the eye again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years.") Since virginity is prized above all, one could assume that this conclusion has allowed grown men to have sex with little girls with immunity. A grown-up woman is not deflowered by having sex with a small boy, however, since he is only like a "piece of wood."]
It was taught: R. Judah used to say, A man is bound to say the following three blessings daily: "[Blessed art thou...] who hast not made me a heathen," ".... who hast not made me a woman"; and "... who hast not made me a brutish man." R. Aha b. Jacob once overhead his son saying "[Blessed art thou...] who hast not made me a brutish man," whereupon he said to him, "And this too!" Said the other, "Then what blessing should I say instead?" [He replied,]...h who hast not made me a slave." And is not that the same as a woman? - a slave is more contemptible.
Menachoth 43b-44a
[A "prayer" or "benediction" to be said by a Jewish man every day: "Thank God for not making me a Gentile, a woman or a slave."]
Do not save Goyim in danger of death.
Show no mercy to the Goyim.
Hilkkoth Akum X1
A Jew is forbidden to drink from a glass of wine which a Gentile has touched, because the touch has made the wine unclean.
Schulchan Aruch, Johre Deah, 122
And he who desires that none of his vows made during the year shall be valid, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare, 'Every vow which I may make in the future shall be null.1 [HIS VOWS ARE THEN INVALID,] PROVIDING THAT HE REMEMBERS THIS AT THE TIME OF THE VOW.
Nedarim 23b
[Essentially the "Kol Nidre" prayer said every year at Yom Kippur. Fn. 1 says: "This may have provided a support for the custom of reciting Kol Nidre (a formula for dispensation of vows) prior to the Evening Service of the Day of Atonement (Ran.). The context makes it perfectly obvious that only vows, where the maker abjures benefit from aught, or imposes an interdict of his own property upon his neighbour, are referred to. Though the beginning of the year (New Year) is mentioned here, the Day of Atonement was probably chosen on account of its great solemnity. But Kol Nidre as part of the ritual is later than the Talmud, and, as seen from the following statement about R. Huna h. Hinena, the law of revocation in advance was not made public."]
I don't know of any other religion in the world which has marketed like a business franchise, holocaust museums where Jews commercially exploit their own people's tragedy. Also, I know of no other religion which has gained the power to actually throw people in jail who do not agree with Jews, do you? I know of no other religion that lies about their holocaust calling it the biggest one in the world which it never was, the Communists having killed far more and European colonials killing the most people of all, some 2 to 300 million Native Americans, one tribe of which I have worked for for over 17 years now.
It isn't just Judaism though that carries a terrible attitude towards non-members or non-believers. All three Abrahamic religions have produced terrorists killing innocents in the name of God. We don't need to carry such savagery in religious form into the New Age and if we don't speak up against savagery in religious form who will? Who will buck the past and present religious wars going on by Abrahamics in action if not us?
From Acharya S
7-26-9
Note: This is from the historian who's work inspired "Zeigeist" film. She is one of the most thorough of researchers and her studies of the Talmud cannot be defamed as "anti-semitic" as those protecting Judaism so often use as a means to stop free inquiry into this religion.
Talmudic Quotes
The decisions of the Talmud are words of the living God. Jehovah himself asks the opinions of earthly rabbis when there are difficult affairs in heaven.
Rabbi Menachen, Comments for the Fifth Book
Jehovah himself in heaven studies the Talmud, standing: he has such respect for that book.
Tractate Mechilla/Me'ilah
R. Johanan said: A heathen who studies the Torah deserves death, for it is written, Moses commanded us a law for an inheritance; it is our inheritance, not theirs. Then why is this not included in the Noachian laws? -- On the reading morasha [an inheritance] he steals it; on the reading me'orasah [betrothed], he is guilty as one who violates a betrothed maiden, who is stoned. An objection is raised: R. Meir used to say. Whence do we know that even a heathen who studies the Torah is as a High Priest? From the verse, [Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments:] which, if man do, he shall live in them. Priests, Levites, and Israelites are not mentioned, but men: hence thou mayest learn that even a heathen who studies the Torah is as a High Priest! -- That refers to their own seven laws.
Sanhedrin 59a
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
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 Dia 17
We beg Thee, O Lord, indict Thy wrath on the nations not believing in Thee, and not calling on Thy name. Let down Thy wrath on them and inflict them with Thy wrath. Drive them away in Thy wrath and crush them into pieces. Take away, O Lord, all bone from them. In a moment indict all disbelievers. Destroy in a moment all foes of Thy nation. Draw out with the root, disperse and ruin unworthy nations. Destroy them! Destroy them immediately, in this very moment!
Prayer said on the eve of Passover (Pranajtis: Christianus in Talmudae Judeorum, quotations from: Synagoga Judaica)
The Feast of Tabernacles is the period when Israel triumphs over the other people of the world. That is why during this feast we seize the loulab and carry it as a trophy to show that we have conquered all other peoples, known as "populace"...
Zohar, Toldoth Noah 63b
When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves.
Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D
Resh Lakish said: He who is observant of fringes will be privileged to be served by two thousand eight hundred slaves, for it is said, Thus saith the Lord of hosts: In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold, out of all the languages of the nations shall even take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you, etc.
Mas. Shabbath 31b
On the house of the Goy [Goy means unclean, and is the disparaging term for a non-Jew] one looks as on the fold of cattle.
Tosefta, Tractate Erubin VIII
When a Jew has a Gentile in his clutches, another Jew may go to the same Gentile, lend him money and in turn deceive him, so that the Gentile shall be ruined. For the property of a Gentile, according to our law, belongs to no one, and the first Jew that passes has full right to seize it.
Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 156
If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth.
Choschen Hamm 388, 15
Happy will be the lost of Israel, whom the Holy One, blessed be He, has chosen from amongst the Goyim, of whom the Scriptures say: "Their work is but vanity, it is an illusion at which we must laugh; they will all perish when God visits them in His wrath." At the moment when the Holy One, blessed be He, will exterminate all the Goyim of the world, Israel alone will subsist, even as it is written: "The Lord alone will appear great on that day!...
Zohar, Vayshlah 177b
That the Jewish nation is the only nation selected by God, while all the remaining ones are contemptible and hateful.
That 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.
A Jew may rob a Goy, he may cheat him over a bill, which should not be perceived by him, otherwise the name of God would become dishonoured.
Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat, 348
R. Hanina said: If a heathen smites a Jew, he is worthy of death; for it is written, And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian. [Ex. 2:12] R. Hanina also said: He who smites an Israelite on the jaw, is as though he had thus assaulted the Divine Presence; for it is written, one who smiteth man [i.e. an Israelite] attacketh the Holy One.
Sanhedrin 58b
[In other words, if a non-Jew kills a Jew, the non-Jew can be killed. Punching an Israelite is akin to assaulting God. (But killing a non-Jew is NOT like assaulting God.]
If a goy killed a goy or a Jew he is responsible, but if a Jew killed a goy he is not responsible.
Tosefta, Aboda Zara, VIII, 5
Has it not been taught: "With respect to robbery -- if one stole or robbed or [seized] a beautiful woman, or [committed] similar offences, if [these were perpetrated] by one Cuthean ["Cuthean" or "Samaritan" = goy/gentile/heathen/non-Jew] against another, [the theft, etc.] must not be kept, and likewise [the theft] of an Israelite by a Cuthean, but that of a Cuthean by an Israelite may be retained?" But if robbery is a capital offence, should not the Tanna have taught: He incurs a penalty? -- Because the second clause wishes to state, "but that of a Cuthean by an Israelite may be retained," therefore the former clause reads, "[theft of an Israelite by a Cuthean] must not be kept." But where a penalty is incurred, it is explicitly stated, for the commencing clause teaches: "For murder, whether of a Cuthean by a Cuthean, or of an Israelite by a Cuthean, punishment is incurred; but of a Cuthean by an Israelite, there is no death penalty?"
Sanhedrin 57a
[Translation: A Jew may rob a Goy, but a Goy may not rob a Jew. If a Goy murders another Goy or a Jew, he should be killed, but a Jew will not be incur the death penalty for killing a non-Jew.]
Kill the Goyim by any means possible.
Choshen Ha'mishpat 425:50
Everyone who sheds the blood of the impious [non-Jews] is as acceptable to God as he who offers a sacrifice to God.
Yalkut 245c
Extermination of the Christians is a necessary sacrifice.
Zohar, Shemoth
Tob shebbe goyyim harog - Even the best of the Goyim (Gentiles) should be killed.
Soferim 15, Rule 10
[NB: Hoffman says, "This passage is not from the Soncino edition but is from the original Hebrew of the Babylonian Talmud as quoted by the 1907 Jewish Encyclopedia, published by Funk and Wagnalls and compiled by Isidore Singer, under the entry, 'Gentile,' (p. 617)." Another source says this passage is at Avodah Zara 26b. We have not been able to verify any of these references. It does not seem to be at Avodah Zara 26b of the Soncino edition.]
What is [the meaning of] Mount Sinai? The mountain whereon there descended hostility [sin'ah ] toward idolaters [non-Jews].
Shabbath 89a
The same has been taught as follows: If the ox of an Israelite gores an ox of a Canaanite [non-Jew] there is no liability, but if an ox of a Canaanite gores an ox of an Israelite... the payment is to be in full, as it is said: He stood and measured the earth, he beheld and drove asunder the nations [Gentiles], and again, He shined forth from Mount Paran...implying that from Paran he exposed their money to Israel.
Baba Kama 38a
[Trans: The property of the Israelite is more valuable than that of the Gentile. Mount Paran refers to Deut. 33:2, where God offered the law to the nations (Gentiles), who rejected it. The money of the Gentiles is available to the Israelites.]
ONE SHOULD NOT PLACE CATTLE IN HEATHENS' INNS, BECAUSE THEY ARE SUSPECTED OF IMMORAL PRACTICE WITH THEM. A WOMAN SHOULD NOT BE ALONE WITH THEM, BECAUSE THEY ARE SUSPECTED OF LEWDNESS, NOR SHOULD A MAN BE ALONE WITH THEM, BECAUSE THEY ARE SUSPECTED OF SHEDDING BLOOD. . .
Why then should we not leave female animals alone with female heathens? -- Said Mar 'Ukba b. Hama: Because heathens frequent their neighbours' wives, and should one by chance not find her in, and find the cattle there, he might use it immorally. You may also say that even if he should find her in he might use the animal, as a Master has said: Heathens prefer the cattle of Israelites to their own wives, for R. Johanan said: When the serpent came unto Eve he infused filthy lust into her.
Avodah Zarah 22a-b
He who pours the oil of anointing over cattle or vessels is not guilty; if over heathens or the dead, he is not guilty. The law relating to cattle and vessels is right, for it is written: Upon the flesh of man [adam] shall it not be poured; and cattle and vessels are not man. Also with regard to the dead, [it is plausible] that he is exempt, since after death one is called corpse and not man. But why is one exempt in the case of heathens; are they not in the category of adam?-No, it is written: And ye my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, are adam [man]: Ye are called adam but heathens are not called 'adam. But is it not written: And the persons [adam] were sixteen thousand? -- Because it is used in opposition to cattle. But is it not written: And should I not have pity on Nineveh [that great city, wherein are more than six score thousand persons [adam]?--This too is used in opposition to cattle.
Mas. K'rithoth 6b
[This passage refers to anointing with oil. "Heathens," i.e., Gentiles, are not "adam" or man but are equated with cattle]
An objection was raised: And the persons were sixteen thousand!--This is due to [the mention of] cattle. Wherein are more than six-score thousand persons that cannot discern between their right and their left hand!--This is due [to the mention of] cattle.
Mas. Yevamoth 61b
[Again non-Jews are referred to as "cattle."]
All Israelites will have a part in the future world... The Goyim, at the end of the world will be handed over to the angel Duma and sent down to hell.
Zohar, Shemoth, Toldoth Noah, Lekh-Lekha
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
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 Chaim 14, 20, 32, 33, 39
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 Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348
A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl.
Gad. Shas. 2:2
A boy-goy after nine years and one day old, and a girl after three years and one day old, are considered filthy.
Pereferkowicz, Talmud t.v., p. 11
Raba stated: With reference to the Rabbinical statement that [legally] an Egyptian [Gentile] has no father, it must not be imagined that this is due to [the Egyptians'] excessive indulgence in carnal gratification, owing to which it is not known [who the father was], but that if this were known it is to be taken into consideration; but [the fact is] that even if this is known it is not taken into consideration.... Thus it may be inferred that the All Merciful declared their children to be legally fatherless, for [so indeed it is also] written, Whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses.
Yevamoth 98a
[Trans.: A non-Jew is "legally fatherless," regardless of whether or not the father is known. Gentile children are essentially asses and horses, i.e., animals.]
[The daughters of the heathens] should be considered as in the state of <http://jewish.com/askarabbi/askarabbi/a ... htm>niddah [separation?] from their cradle...
Avodah Zarah 36b
They decreed in connection with a heathen child that it should cause defilement by seminal emission so that an Israelite child should not become accustomed to commit pederasty with him.... It is therefore to be concluded that a heathen girl [communicates defilement] from the age of three years and one day, for inasmuch as she is then capable of the sexual act she likewise defiles by a flux. This is obvious!
Avodah Zarah 36b-37a
R. Joseph said: Come and hear! A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition [intercourse], and if her deceased husband's brother cohabits with her, she becomes his. The penalty of adultery may be incurred through her; [if a niddah] she defiles him who has connection with her, so that he in turn defiles that upon which he lies, as a garment which has lain upon [a person afflicted with gonorrhoea].
Sanhedrin 55b
Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Pederasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that.24 (24) I.e., Rab makes nine years the minimum; but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age, no guilt is incurred. Samuel makes three the minimum.
Sanhedrin 54b
Raba said. It means this: When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this [three years old], it is as if one puts the finger into the eye; but when a small boy has intercourse with a grown-up woman he makes her as 'a girl who is injured by a piece of wood.'...
Kethuboth 11b
[This debate concerns whether or not someone is a virgin. Virginity is prized above all, such that it is believed that a girl under the age of three will regain her virginity, even if a man has had intercourse with her. (Fn. 7 says, in regard to putting "the finger into the eye": "I.e., tears come to the eye again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years.") Since virginity is prized above all, one could assume that this conclusion has allowed grown men to have sex with little girls with immunity. A grown-up woman is not deflowered by having sex with a small boy, however, since he is only like a "piece of wood."]
It was taught: R. Judah used to say, A man is bound to say the following three blessings daily: "[Blessed art thou...] who hast not made me a heathen," ".... who hast not made me a woman"; and "... who hast not made me a brutish man." R. Aha b. Jacob once overhead his son saying "[Blessed art thou...] who hast not made me a brutish man," whereupon he said to him, "And this too!" Said the other, "Then what blessing should I say instead?" [He replied,]...h who hast not made me a slave." And is not that the same as a woman? - a slave is more contemptible.
Menachoth 43b-44a
[A "prayer" or "benediction" to be said by a Jewish man every day: "Thank God for not making me a Gentile, a woman or a slave."]
Do not save Goyim in danger of death.
Show no mercy to the Goyim.
Hilkkoth Akum X1
A Jew is forbidden to drink from a glass of wine which a Gentile has touched, because the touch has made the wine unclean.
Schulchan Aruch, Johre Deah, 122
And he who desires that none of his vows made during the year shall be valid, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare, 'Every vow which I may make in the future shall be null.1 [HIS VOWS ARE THEN INVALID,] PROVIDING THAT HE REMEMBERS THIS AT THE TIME OF THE VOW.
Nedarim 23b
[Essentially the "Kol Nidre" prayer said every year at Yom Kippur. Fn. 1 says: "This may have provided a support for the custom of reciting Kol Nidre (a formula for dispensation of vows) prior to the Evening Service of the Day of Atonement (Ran.). The context makes it perfectly obvious that only vows, where the maker abjures benefit from aught, or imposes an interdict of his own property upon his neighbour, are referred to. Though the beginning of the year (New Year) is mentioned here, the Day of Atonement was probably chosen on account of its great solemnity. But Kol Nidre as part of the ritual is later than the Talmud, and, as seen from the following statement about R. Huna h. Hinena, the law of revocation in advance was not made public."]
I don't know of any other religion in the world which has marketed like a business franchise, holocaust museums where Jews commercially exploit their own people's tragedy. Also, I know of no other religion which has gained the power to actually throw people in jail who do not agree with Jews, do you? I know of no other religion that lies about their holocaust calling it the biggest one in the world which it never was, the Communists having killed far more and European colonials killing the most people of all, some 2 to 300 million Native Americans, one tribe of which I have worked for for over 17 years now.
It isn't just Judaism though that carries a terrible attitude towards non-members or non-believers. All three Abrahamic religions have produced terrorists killing innocents in the name of God. We don't need to carry such savagery in religious form into the New Age and if we don't speak up against savagery in religious form who will? Who will buck the past and present religious wars going on by Abrahamics in action if not us?
-
bluethread
- Savant
- Posts: 9129
- Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 1:10 pm
Post #23
There are jews who do not hold the Talmud higher than HaTorah. Every belief system, even atheism and scientific humanism, have those who profess things that appear, at least to me, to contradict the basic principles of their belief systems. I propose that to the extent that the Talmudic references you quoted establish Adonai's people as inherently better than anyone else, they violate HaTorah.biomystic wrote:Jewish Talmudic Quotes - Facts Are Facts
From Acharya S
7-26-9
Note: This is from the historian who's work inspired "Zeigeist" film. She is one of the most thorough of researchers and her studies of the Talmud cannot be defamed as "anti-semitic" as those protecting Judaism so often use as a means to stop free inquiry into this religion.
Talmudic Quotes
The decisions of the Talmud are words of the living God. Jehovah himself asks the opinions of earthly rabbis when there are difficult affairs in heaven.
HaTorah makes it clear, (Deut. 9:5-6) "It is not because of your righteousness or your integrity that you are going in to take possession of their land; but on account of the wickedness of these nations, the LORD your God will drive them out before you, to accomplish what he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Understand, then, that it is not because of your righteousness that the LORD your God is giving you this good land to possess, for you are a stiff-necked people."
Adonai blesses His people for two reasons and two reasons only, for His name's sake or as the circumstancial consequences of His judgement on others. The nations also recieve these circumstancial blessings. Adonai says of Cyrus, Is. 45:1 "Thus saith the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden , to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut". Some might argue that Cyrus was Hadassah's(Ester's) son and therefore a jew or that he permitted the return. However, he was the king of Persia and Adonai blessed him and his kingdom. We also see this in (Amos 6:14) "But, behold, I will raise up against you a nation, O house of Israel, saith the LORD the God of hosts; and they shall afflict you from the entering in of Hemath unto the river of the wilderness." Adonai has chosen His people to be a light to the nations. A light illuminates both good and evil. To the extent that His people are good, He will bless them, but if they do not live according to Adonai's ways, He will curse, them. Whether in blessing or cursing, Adonai's people stand as an example to the nations of what Adonai requires.
-
Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Post #24
Although the lie was repeated by Acharya S , the various passages,(and answers to the fabrications it has is ) http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/anti-masonry/van_hyning.htmlbiomystic wrote:Jewish Talmudic Quotes - Facts Are Facts
From Acharya S
7-26-9
<forgeries, and out context quotes snipped.
Now, one must wonder why someone would have to resort to such a poor resource to 'prove' things... rather than read in context what things really said, and see if it actually existed.
The one that isn't covered in that list is the first one, and this covers it
andLAIM
"The decisions of the Talmud are the words of the living God. Jehovah Himself asks the opinion of the earthly rabbis when there are difficult affairs in heaven." - Rabbi Menachem Commentary on Fifth Book
RESPONSE
Although the sources quoted do not exist it is because of the ignorance of the one who copied it, but the general idea is correct. The Talmud and commentaries state many times that both sides of a dispute between Talmudic sages are actually true they are just stating the two ways of logic reasoning while both concepts originate from G-d's divine wisdom. That is why so to speak G-d learns the Talmud, it means to say he is the source of all the Talmudic reasoning, and he "states" the laws in name of the sages who projected the divine logic of each opinion. By the way the sources quoted are definitely forged as name "Jehova" is never mentioned in any novellae apart from the scriptures as it is strictly forbidden to utter it at all.
and on and on and on.
CLAIM
"Jehovah Himself studies the Talmud standing, he has such respect for that book."-Tract Mechilla.
RESPONSE
There is no tractate called Mechila and there seems to be no mentioning of G-d studying the Talmud standing. In general whenever you see the word "Jehovah" in a cite it is the best proof it is forged as this name is never ever mentioned in the Talmud or Poskim as it is strictly prohibited to pronounce it. E.S.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
-
cnorman18
Post #25
Some of you know what's coming. Enjoy. I know I will.
(For some reason, the phrase "like a ton of bricks" comes to mind....)
Quotations from or allusions to "Libbre David" can only be found in antisemitic books, on antisemitic websites, or on websites exposing them. Period. Google the reference yourself, everyone. Check the Table of Contents and see if you can find Libbre David.
This is proof positive, in short, that this material can ONLY have come from a hate site.
We're done already, but let's look at a few more:
There is, elsewhere, a teaching which says that a Jew may certainly swear that there is nothing against Gentiles in the Talmud -- because it is a true oath.
But, much more important for our purposes here:
Note the highlighted source of this fake "quotation" (and the source for most of these libelous "quotes"): Justinas Pranaitis was a late 19th-century Russian/Lithuanian priest -- and a blatant antisemite whose work, named above, was translated into English in 1939 and continues to be circulated among Jew-haters, neo-Nazis, and other bigots to this day. It is available from no other sources. There is no scholarship in it, just lots of deliberate distortions, intentional misquotations, blatant mistranslations, and plain old made-up lies.
Pranaitis was thoroughly discredited and humiliated in the famous trial of Menahem Mendel Beilis in Russia in 1912; Beilis was accused of the Blood Libel, i.e., murdering a Christian child so his blood could be used in Passover matzahs. Pranaitis was called as an expert witness for the prosecution (consider that for a moment).
From the link, quoting from Beilis himself:
One of the ways in which Pranaitis was proven a fraud, by the way, was that he neither read nor understood Aramaic, and, incredibly, was ignorant of the fact that the bulk of the Talmud is written in that language and not in Hebrew. So much for the Czars expert witness, and so much for his quotes from the Talmud. This material was thoroughly discredited more than a hundred years ago, and only antisemites refer to it today. Again, proof positive of the source and nature of these vicious libels.
This next one is so ludicrous its almost funny:
Second; There is no such reference as "Zohar, Toldoth Noah 63b."
Third, and unsurprisingly: there is no such quote anywhere in Jewish literature. I say "unsurprisingly" because the Feast of Tabernacles, called Sukkot or Succoth in Hebrew, is a commemoration of the time the Israelites spent in the Wilderness living in rude shelters, or "tabernacles," hardly a time of "triumph."
It is also a HARVEST festival, hence the shaking of the lulav in services. A lulav is a bundle of palm, willow and myrtle leaves, together with a Mediterranean citrus fruit called an etrog. Yes, a very warlike trophy. Shows the conquest of -- plants.
Even the numbering is fabricated. Again, references like "156," "388, 15" and "348" are meaningless in the Talmud.
Were almost done.
Ah. Hoffman would be Michael A. Hoffman III, antisemite, Holocaust denier and propagandist. See the link.
I dont have all day to dissect and expose every phony quotation here; suffice it to say that the few of these passages which are not complete fabrications are out-of-context quotes distorted in order to misrepresent their meaning. These are not accidental misperceptions, but deliberate misrepresentations of the truth.
For example, some are from conversations between rabbis, one of whom does indeed put forth these fanatical arguments - but which ideas are effectively and definitively refuted and destroyed by the other rabbis present. These ideas were included in the Talmud only to be rebutted and unequivocally disavowed, and whoever lifted them from the Talmud certainly understood this. There are many such passages, and many such opportunities for calculated smears; the Talmud runs to more than fifty volumes in English.
A few more:
And, of course, there is no such quotation in the Zohar or anywhere else.
Some of the rest of this is so contemptible I hesitate to deal with it; one wonders at the motivations, never mind the HONESTY, of people who seek to so viciously defame one of the most ancient and honorable religions in human history, not to mention an entire people. Here are some especially nasty examples of smear of the worst kind:
The real gist of the matter is that a woman who was the victim of rape as a child was to be shielded from the usual consequences of premarital intercourse, and was to be considered a virgin for purposes of marriage and bride-price. In other words, a victim of child sexual abuse was not to be further injured by social ostracism or other penalty. How horrible. How inhuman...
The punishment of child rapists was dealt with in other sections; this section was concerned with the laws of purity.
These falsified quotations, and their supposed meanings, are especially contemptible and dishonest. It's hard to imagine a distortion more evil and vicious than this one. Please understand the depth of this infamy; this person is actually saying that Jews teach these things as a part of our religion. Murder of and theft from non-Jews is perfectly acceptable; non-Jews are animals, and not human; child rape is nothing to be concerned about; and so on.
Does anyone really believe that Jews, or members of ANY religion, actually teach and believe such things?
What kind of person WOULD believe that?
Just a few more:
I dont think Biomystics concluding remarks are worth comment, considering what has been so clearly displayed here: Gross ignorance of the most elementary precepts of the Jewish religion; a dependence on blatantly antisemitic and hate-peddling sources, which are proven dishonest and deceptive; and a desire to smear and defame what he CLAIMS is the religion of his birth. The information I have posted here speaks for itself -- about the credibility of Biomystic, the nature of his sources, his knowledge of his supposed heritage, and finally his character. I shall not describe or attach names to any of those. I dont think theres any need to.
Again, the Talmud is available on your iPad or cellphone or Kindle for less than a dollar. Feel free to spend a few weeks, or more likely months, searching for these quotations that dont exist. Knock yourselves out; Ive been dissecting and exposing posts like this one for years. You can search them, right here on our forum. Too bad Biomystic didnt.
This was, as always, fun. Nothing I like having for breakfast more than -- shall we say, persons -- like Biomystic who purport to tell the truth about Judaism.
(For some reason, the phrase "like a ton of bricks" comes to mind....)
Cannot be "defamed as anti-semitic, huh? Well, let's take a closer look at this "thorough research." I won't bother to analyze and expose all of these quotes, but here are some highlights which establish the pattern beyond doubt:biomystic wrote:Jewish Talmudic Quotes - Facts Are Facts
From Acharya S
7-26-9
Note: This is from the historian who's work inspired "Zeigeist" film. She is one of the most thorough of researchers and her studies of the Talmud cannot be defamed as "anti-semitic" as those protecting Judaism so often use as a means to stop free inquiry into this religion.
This "quotation" is a complete fabrication. No such book as "Libbre David" exists in the Talmud or anywhere in Jewish literature, and the supposed "quotes" do not exist anywhere, either. By the way, the COMPLETE Babylonian Talmud is available in English in any big-city library -- and its now available in ebook form for less than a dollar. Its hardly a secret document, and these claims are easy to verify -- or refute.
Talmudic Quotes
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
Quotations from or allusions to "Libbre David" can only be found in antisemitic books, on antisemitic websites, or on websites exposing them. Period. Google the reference yourself, everyone. Check the Table of Contents and see if you can find Libbre David.
This is proof positive, in short, that this material can ONLY have come from a hate site.
We're done already, but let's look at a few more:
Another total fabrication. The two words of the supposed title mean "Responses" and are part of the titles of 1500 or so books, but there is no such book in the Talmud and the quotation does not exist anywhere in Jewish literature.
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 Dia 17
There is, elsewhere, a teaching which says that a Jew may certainly swear that there is nothing against Gentiles in the Talmud -- because it is a true oath.
There is no such prayer, of course; the rite on the eve of Passover is called the Seder, and the book containing the order of service is called the Haggadah. There are many versions, easily obtainable online or in any large bookstore or library. This fake prayer will be found in NONE of them.
We beg Thee, O Lord, indict Thy wrath on the nations not believing in Thee.... [etc.]
Prayer said on the eve of Passover (Pranajtis: Christianus in Talmudae Judeorum, quotations from: Synagoga Judaica)
But, much more important for our purposes here:
Note the highlighted source of this fake "quotation" (and the source for most of these libelous "quotes"): Justinas Pranaitis was a late 19th-century Russian/Lithuanian priest -- and a blatant antisemite whose work, named above, was translated into English in 1939 and continues to be circulated among Jew-haters, neo-Nazis, and other bigots to this day. It is available from no other sources. There is no scholarship in it, just lots of deliberate distortions, intentional misquotations, blatant mistranslations, and plain old made-up lies.
Pranaitis was thoroughly discredited and humiliated in the famous trial of Menahem Mendel Beilis in Russia in 1912; Beilis was accused of the Blood Libel, i.e., murdering a Christian child so his blood could be used in Passover matzahs. Pranaitis was called as an expert witness for the prosecution (consider that for a moment).
From the link, quoting from Beilis himself:
(In an antisemitic Czarist court, let it be noted, with a handpicked jury of Jew-hating peasants. This remarkable true story is the basis of the novel The Fixer by Bernard Malamud and the 1968 movie of the same name, which was nominated for 5 Academy Awards.)"His credibility rapidly evaporated, however, when the defence demonstrated his ignorance of some simple Talmudic concepts and definitions, such as hullin, to the point where "many in the audience occasionally laughed out loud when he clearly became confused and couldn't even intelligibly answer some of the questions asked by my lawyer".
A Tsarist secret police agent is quoted, reporting on Pranaitis' testimony, as saying:
Cross-examination of Pranaitis has weakened the evidential value of his expert opinion, exposing lack of knowledge of texts and insufficient knowledge of Jewish literature. Because of his amateurish knowledge and lack of resourcefulness, Pranaitis' expert opinion is of very low value.
"Beilis was eventually found not guilty."
One of the ways in which Pranaitis was proven a fraud, by the way, was that he neither read nor understood Aramaic, and, incredibly, was ignorant of the fact that the bulk of the Talmud is written in that language and not in Hebrew. So much for the Czars expert witness, and so much for his quotes from the Talmud. This material was thoroughly discredited more than a hundred years ago, and only antisemites refer to it today. Again, proof positive of the source and nature of these vicious libels.
This next one is so ludicrous its almost funny:
First: The Zohar is not a part of the 2nd-century Talmud, but a 10th-century work of mysticism.
The Feast of Tabernacles is the period when Israel triumphs over the other people of the world. That is why during this feast we seize the loulab and carry it as a trophy to show that we have conquered all other peoples, known as "populace"...
Zohar, Toldoth Noah 63b
Second; There is no such reference as "Zohar, Toldoth Noah 63b."
Third, and unsurprisingly: there is no such quote anywhere in Jewish literature. I say "unsurprisingly" because the Feast of Tabernacles, called Sukkot or Succoth in Hebrew, is a commemoration of the time the Israelites spent in the Wilderness living in rude shelters, or "tabernacles," hardly a time of "triumph."
It is also a HARVEST festival, hence the shaking of the lulav in services. A lulav is a bundle of palm, willow and myrtle leaves, together with a Mediterranean citrus fruit called an etrog. Yes, a very warlike trophy. Shows the conquest of -- plants.
Again, no such book in the Talmud. The supposed title is the name of a 10th-century Bible commentator, and both the quote and the "56-D" are fabricated.
When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves.
Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D
No such quote, of course; but more importantly, the claim about the meaning of the word goy is a falsehood. Goy, in Hebrew, simply means "nation" and has no negative connotation at all. Indeed, the term is often used, in Jewish services, in the phrase goy Yisroel, "the nation of Israel." Goyim is the plural form, and is a Hebrew (and Yiddish) idiom meaning "gentiles"; but it is no more derogatory than that word is in English.
On the house of the Goy [Goy means unclean, and is the disparaging term for a non-Jew] one looks as on the fold of cattle.
The book referred to in these "quotes," Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat (or Hamm), is, again, not a part of the Talmud but a sixteenth-century commentary. The quotations are, again, wholly fabricated. The actual text of the Talmud says, "it is forbidden to steal even a small item from a Jew or non-Jew, from children or from adults."
When a Jew has a Gentile in his clutches, another Jew may go to the same Gentile, lend him money and in turn deceive him, so that the Gentile shall be ruined. For the property of a Gentile, according to our law, belongs to no one, and the first Jew that passes has full right to seize it.
Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 156
If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth.
Choschen Hamm 388, 15
That the Jewish nation is the only nation selected by God, while all the remaining ones are contemptible and hateful.
That 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.
A Jew may rob a Goy, he may cheat him over a bill, which should not be perceived by him, otherwise the name of God would become dishonoured.
Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat, 348
Even the numbering is fabricated. Again, references like "156," "388, 15" and "348" are meaningless in the Talmud.
Ho, hum. Once again; the Zohar is not a part of the Talmud, there is no such quotation, and the numbering is fake as well (Talmud references sometimes contain letters which specify upon which part of a page a quote may be found, since Talmud pages are folio-sized; the Zohar uses no such notation).
Happy will be the lost of Israel, whom the Holy One, blessed be He, has chosen from amongst the Goyim, of whom the Scriptures say: "Their work is but vanity, it is an illusion at which we must laugh; they will all perish when God visits them in His wrath." At the moment when the Holy One, blessed be He, will exterminate all the Goyim of the world, Israel alone will subsist, even as it is written: "The Lord alone will appear great on that day!...
Zohar, Vayshlah 177b
One more time, all together now: Tosefta is not a part of the Talmud, the references are meaningless, and the quotes do not exist.
If a goy killed a goy or a Jew he is responsible, but if a Jew killed a goy he is not responsible.
Tosefta, Aboda Zara, VIII, 5
Were almost done.
Tob shebbe goyyim harog - Even the best of the Goyim (Gentiles) should be killed.
Soferim 15, Rule 10
[NB: Hoffman says....
Ah. Hoffman would be Michael A. Hoffman III, antisemite, Holocaust denier and propagandist. See the link.
I beg to differ; this passage does, in a refreshing change, actually exist; BUT -- once again, the quote is not from the Talmud, but from a commentary upon it - where it is made clear that this command applied only during one of the ancient wars of Israel against its enemies. Textbook case of deliberately dishonest out-of-context distortion and misrepresentation.
..."This passage is not from the Soncino edition but is from the original Hebrew of the Babylonian Talmud as quoted by the 1907 Jewish Encyclopedia, published by Funk and Wagnalls and compiled by Isidore Singer, under the entry, 'Gentile,' (p. 617)." Another source says this passage is at Avodah Zara 26b. We have not been able to verify any of these references. It does not seem to be at Avodah Zara 26b of the Soncino edition.]
I dont have all day to dissect and expose every phony quotation here; suffice it to say that the few of these passages which are not complete fabrications are out-of-context quotes distorted in order to misrepresent their meaning. These are not accidental misperceptions, but deliberate misrepresentations of the truth.
For example, some are from conversations between rabbis, one of whom does indeed put forth these fanatical arguments - but which ideas are effectively and definitively refuted and destroyed by the other rabbis present. These ideas were included in the Talmud only to be rebutted and unequivocally disavowed, and whoever lifted them from the Talmud certainly understood this. There are many such passages, and many such opportunities for calculated smears; the Talmud runs to more than fifty volumes in English.
A few more:
What a surprise; the Zohar, again, is not a part of the Talmud, and Lekh-Lekha is actually the title of one of the Parashot, or weekly Torah portions, of Genesis. It refers specifically to the call of Abraham in Genesis 12. It would be surprising if there is anything there about a future world -- there is no reference to an Afterlife anywhere in the Torah, and certainly not in THAT passage.
All Israelites will have a part in the future world... The Goyim, at the end of the world will be handed over to the angel Duma and sent down to hell.
Zohar, Shemoth, Toldoth Noah, Lekh-Lekha
And, of course, there is no such quotation in the Zohar or anywhere else.
Some of the rest of this is so contemptible I hesitate to deal with it; one wonders at the motivations, never mind the HONESTY, of people who seek to so viciously defame one of the most ancient and honorable religions in human history, not to mention an entire people. Here are some especially nasty examples of smear of the worst kind:
Some of these are entirely fabricated; others which are, as noted above, not from the Talmud anyway are taken out of context. Notice, though, especially, the conclusion of this thorough researcher that the meaning of all this is, among other things, that girls under three may be raped by adult men with immunity, that is, without penalty.
A boy-goy after nine years and one day old, and a girl after three years and one day old, are considered filthy.
Pereferkowicz, Talmud t.v., p. 11
They decreed in connection with a heathen child that it should cause defilement by seminal emission so that an Israelite child should not become accustomed to commit pederasty with him.... It is therefore to be concluded that a heathen girl [communicates defilement] from the age of three years and one day, for inasmuch as she is then capable of the sexual act she likewise defiles by a flux. This is obvious!
Avodah Zarah 36b-37a
R. Joseph said: Come and hear! A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition [intercourse], and if her deceased husband's brother cohabits with her, she becomes his. The penalty of adultery may be incurred through her; [if a niddah] she defiles him who has connection with her, so that he in turn defiles that upon which he lies, as a garment which has lain upon [a person afflicted with gonorrhoea].
Sanhedrin 55b
Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Pederasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that.24 (24) I.e., Rab makes nine years the minimum; but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age, no guilt is incurred. Samuel makes three the minimum.
Sanhedrin 54b
Raba said. It means this: When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this [three years old], it is as if one puts the finger into the eye; but when a small boy has intercourse with a grown-up woman he makes her as 'a girl who is injured by a piece of wood.'...
Kethuboth 11b
[This debate concerns whether or not someone is a virgin. Virginity is prized above all, such that it is believed that a girl under the age of three will regain her virginity, even if a man has had intercourse with her. (Fn. 7 says, in regard to putting "the finger into the eye": "I.e., tears come to the eye again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years.") Since virginity is prized above all, one could assume that this conclusion has allowed grown men to have sex with little girls with immunity. A grown-up woman is not deflowered by having sex with a small boy, however, since he is only like a "piece of wood."
The real gist of the matter is that a woman who was the victim of rape as a child was to be shielded from the usual consequences of premarital intercourse, and was to be considered a virgin for purposes of marriage and bride-price. In other words, a victim of child sexual abuse was not to be further injured by social ostracism or other penalty. How horrible. How inhuman...
The punishment of child rapists was dealt with in other sections; this section was concerned with the laws of purity.
These falsified quotations, and their supposed meanings, are especially contemptible and dishonest. It's hard to imagine a distortion more evil and vicious than this one. Please understand the depth of this infamy; this person is actually saying that Jews teach these things as a part of our religion. Murder of and theft from non-Jews is perfectly acceptable; non-Jews are animals, and not human; child rape is nothing to be concerned about; and so on.
Does anyone really believe that Jews, or members of ANY religion, actually teach and believe such things?
What kind of person WOULD believe that?
Just a few more:
These, yet again, are not from the Talmud, but from the twelfth-century rabbi Maimonides who wrote a thousand years later. The reference is to speculations about a hypothetical future time when Jews have power over non-Jews (unimaginable in his day) - that is, the Messianic Age - and did not refer to "Goyim" at all, but to idol worshippers, specifically those who practiced human sacrifice.
Do not save Goyim in danger of death.
Show no mercy to the Goyim.
Hilkkoth Akum X1
Pure horse manure. The true meaning of the prayer in question here is known to every Jew, taught from the cradle. The famous -- and very beautiful -- Kol Nidre prayer is the subject; that prayer asks to be released from all vows which one has made to God, and only to God, in the previous year, and has nothing to do with any vows or contracts with other humans. The lie about Jews being free to break promises and contracts to others, particularly Gentiles, is a common canard among antisemites. It is, in fact, found virtually NOWHERE ELSE -- just like the rest of this heap of falsehood and misrepresentation.
And he who desires that none of his vows made during the year shall be valid, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare, 'Every vow which I may make in the future shall be null.1 [HIS VOWS ARE THEN INVALID,] PROVIDING THAT HE REMEMBERS THIS AT THE TIME OF THE VOW.
Nedarim 23b
[Essentially the "Kol Nidre" prayer said every year at Yom Kippur. Fn. 1 says: "This may have provided a support for the custom of reciting Kol Nidre (a formula for dispensation of vows) prior to the Evening Service of the Day of Atonement (Ran.). The context makes it perfectly obvious that only vows, where the maker abjures benefit from aught, or imposes an interdict of his own property upon his neighbour, are referred to. Though the beginning of the year (New Year) is mentioned here, the Day of Atonement was probably chosen on account of its great solemnity. But Kol Nidre as part of the ritual is later than the Talmud, and, as seen from the following statement about R. Huna h. Hinena, the law of revocation in advance was not made public."]
I dont think Biomystics concluding remarks are worth comment, considering what has been so clearly displayed here: Gross ignorance of the most elementary precepts of the Jewish religion; a dependence on blatantly antisemitic and hate-peddling sources, which are proven dishonest and deceptive; and a desire to smear and defame what he CLAIMS is the religion of his birth. The information I have posted here speaks for itself -- about the credibility of Biomystic, the nature of his sources, his knowledge of his supposed heritage, and finally his character. I shall not describe or attach names to any of those. I dont think theres any need to.
Again, the Talmud is available on your iPad or cellphone or Kindle for less than a dollar. Feel free to spend a few weeks, or more likely months, searching for these quotations that dont exist. Knock yourselves out; Ive been dissecting and exposing posts like this one for years. You can search them, right here on our forum. Too bad Biomystic didnt.
This was, as always, fun. Nothing I like having for breakfast more than -- shall we say, persons -- like Biomystic who purport to tell the truth about Judaism.
Post #26
Sorry, but I've heard this supposed rebuttals of Talmud quotes many times before and it never works to erase the actual Talmud quotes which can be accessed by those reading unabridged Talmuds in Hebrew, as scholars like Acharya have done. If you could ever make a provable case for her lack of scholarship credentials in any of her work, please do so but she is much better informed than you or I and her scholarship reputation is out there in the public eye so she can't be fooling too many people because if so, where are all the complaints about her views re Judaism?
You see it's real easy to say, "no, that's not true, those verses don't exist, or they're taken out of context" but much harder to prove if you don't provide any Talmud evidence, just the views of Talmud apologists.
Have we talked about Maimonides, Judaism' most honored rabbi and his views of black people as non-human? Or is this too "fabrication"?
I've been to Israel/Palestine twice now and seen for myself Jewish racism on the ground in person. My good Palestinian friends outside of Bethlehem have just recently received their stop and desist from development of their family owned land that Israelis want to build a new Jewish settlement on. For Jews only which if in America would be instantly branded racism but is allowed in Israel because American society needs that Middle East oil as do the Europeans so Israeli racism gets a pass. As it does on most all religious talkboards dominated by Christians who also need Jewish support for their Scriptural evangelical agenda so they're co-opted from the start.
Until we face these inherent fatal flaws in all three Abrahamic religions the world will continue to experience Abrahamic religious warfare because of lies and ill-will towards others not of one's race or religion are being repeatedly taught each generation. Let's put an end to it where we can and that's the point of exposing the foul underbelly of each Abrahamic faith.
You see it's real easy to say, "no, that's not true, those verses don't exist, or they're taken out of context" but much harder to prove if you don't provide any Talmud evidence, just the views of Talmud apologists.
Have we talked about Maimonides, Judaism' most honored rabbi and his views of black people as non-human? Or is this too "fabrication"?
I've been to Israel/Palestine twice now and seen for myself Jewish racism on the ground in person. My good Palestinian friends outside of Bethlehem have just recently received their stop and desist from development of their family owned land that Israelis want to build a new Jewish settlement on. For Jews only which if in America would be instantly branded racism but is allowed in Israel because American society needs that Middle East oil as do the Europeans so Israeli racism gets a pass. As it does on most all religious talkboards dominated by Christians who also need Jewish support for their Scriptural evangelical agenda so they're co-opted from the start.
Until we face these inherent fatal flaws in all three Abrahamic religions the world will continue to experience Abrahamic religious warfare because of lies and ill-will towards others not of one's race or religion are being repeatedly taught each generation. Let's put an end to it where we can and that's the point of exposing the foul underbelly of each Abrahamic faith.
-
cnorman18
Post #27
Ive been trying to find out about this mysterious person, "Acharya S," on the Net. Ive learned a little; first, "Acharya S" is not her name. Her real name is Dorothy M. Murdock. She has a website, and has self-published a few paperback books. No academic credentials in Hebrew or Judaic studies at all, as far as I can see, and shes had nothing published in any historical or scientific journals -- no peer-reviewed publications anywhere -- and before you attribute that to suppression by Jews who control all that, most of her work seems to be about Christianity. In fact, she seems to think that ALL religions are deliberate fabrications, and all from the same source! Its beyond question that her "Talmud quotes" have been lifted verbatim from completely discredited sources that have been established as phony for decades -- in the case of Pranaitis's vicious fabrications, which she has apparently bought whole, for more than a century. She has, in short, in spite of your claims, done no actual research on the Talmud of her own at all, but just copied the "research" -- read "vicious fabrications and lies" -- of others.
Interesting that all you have to say is to tout the "scholarship reputation" of this nobody and try to change the subject. Nothing to say about the FACT that none of her material on the Talmud can be found ANYWHERE but on antisemitic hate sites? Nothing to say about the FACT that your "scholar" HERSELF quoted the notorious liar Pranaitis as one of her sources?
Got any links to her supposed credentials and credits? If her "scholarship reputation is out there in the public eye" -- where is it? WHAT is it? I don't doubt that there aren't many complaints about her work, since she peddles it to anti-Semites, hate sites like Rense (did you catch his story about "structures on the Moon," by the way?), Stormfront and David Icke, and various other nutjob websites. She sells her nutty books (The Christ Conspiracy; The Greatest Story Ever Sold) over the Net too -- here is a review of one of her Jesus books, and here is another. Here are a few more.
An interested student on the Skeptics forum did a search on her work, with this result:
Yes, very scholarly and credible. Give me a break. It seems clear that she just cut-and-pasted some fake Talmud quotes and that was the extent of her "research."
You say that these rebuttals "don't work." Why is that, exactly? What have I said that's false? Why don't you PROVE that it's false? Why do you think your stamping your foot and saying "It IS true, it IS, it IS, it IS!" is going to convince anyone? Why do you think that quotes that don't exist and never did exist "can't be erased?"
So prove your claims, Biomystic. Go get an "unabridged Talmud in Hebrew" -- nice trick, that, since it's mostly written in Aramaic -- and tell us the publisher, the date of publication, the volume number, and the page number where these "quotes" can be found -- and while you're at it, explain why these phony "Talmud" quotes reference books that aren't in the Talmud at all, and some ("Libbre David") that don't exist anywhere. Oh, and let me point out that your explanation, that these are secret editions of the Talmud that only the initiated get to see, boils down to "Jews lie" again.
Sorry, I'm not going to be sidetracked by your supposed visits to Israel -- and let me note three things here; I am on the record numerous times as being opposed to the "settlements"; Israel has NO OIL; and neither of those topics are relevant to the SMEARS against the Talmud and the Jewish religion that you have posted here. The ONLY issue on the table is that you have posted unadulterated, proven antisemitic propaganda and outright lies about my religion and its texts.
I'm challenging you to prove the truth of these vicious lies about the Talmud with more than just repeated assertions. I'm saying here and now that you've got nothing but more antisemitic hate sites to show, more nonexistent sources and more fabricated quotes. Let me phrase it as you did: "You see it's real easy to say, "no, it's all true, those verses do exist and they're not taken out of context" but much harder to prove if you don't provide any Talmud evidence, just the views of antisemitic Jew-haters and proven liars."
All you -- and apparently, your gullible nutcase Ms. Murdock -- have done is swallow some of the most poisonous crap on the Net and regurgitate it with nothing but claims that it's accurate.
Go ahead. Prove me wrong. You can download a copy of the entire Talmud as an ebook right now; do it, and show us all where "Libbre David" is in the table of contents.
PROVE YOUR CLAIMS. As it stands now, you are BUSTED in front of everyone here.
Interesting that all you have to say is to tout the "scholarship reputation" of this nobody and try to change the subject. Nothing to say about the FACT that none of her material on the Talmud can be found ANYWHERE but on antisemitic hate sites? Nothing to say about the FACT that your "scholar" HERSELF quoted the notorious liar Pranaitis as one of her sources?
Got any links to her supposed credentials and credits? If her "scholarship reputation is out there in the public eye" -- where is it? WHAT is it? I don't doubt that there aren't many complaints about her work, since she peddles it to anti-Semites, hate sites like Rense (did you catch his story about "structures on the Moon," by the way?), Stormfront and David Icke, and various other nutjob websites. She sells her nutty books (The Christ Conspiracy; The Greatest Story Ever Sold) over the Net too -- here is a review of one of her Jesus books, and here is another. Here are a few more.
An interested student on the Skeptics forum did a search on her work, with this result:
Interestingly, Ms. Murdock also seems to believe in a worldwide advanced Pygmy civilization that was influenced by "Sky People," or aliens......Nowhere did I find a single academic article or book by Acharya S. beyond the two conspiracy screeds she's known for. Furthermore, the university system is keyed to return book reviews of an author's books under that author's name, even if the review itself is by someone else, and I got nothing, meaning that no one in the academic world has even taken Acharya S. seriously enough even to review her books.
I next did a search under D.M. Murdock, which is believed to be Acharya's real name. I brought up two more Acharya conspiracy screeds and one law review article by a "D.M. Murdock" who turns out to be Daniel Murdock, a law student at the University of Alabama, no connection or relation (I presume) to Merola's historical inspiration.
In short: Acharya S./D.M. Murdock has never written a single thing in the academic realm, and what she has written has never even attracted the slightest bit of attention from anyone in the academic realm. No one in academia has ever cited her work, so far as I can tell.
Yes, very scholarly and credible. Give me a break. It seems clear that she just cut-and-pasted some fake Talmud quotes and that was the extent of her "research."
You say that these rebuttals "don't work." Why is that, exactly? What have I said that's false? Why don't you PROVE that it's false? Why do you think your stamping your foot and saying "It IS true, it IS, it IS, it IS!" is going to convince anyone? Why do you think that quotes that don't exist and never did exist "can't be erased?"
So prove your claims, Biomystic. Go get an "unabridged Talmud in Hebrew" -- nice trick, that, since it's mostly written in Aramaic -- and tell us the publisher, the date of publication, the volume number, and the page number where these "quotes" can be found -- and while you're at it, explain why these phony "Talmud" quotes reference books that aren't in the Talmud at all, and some ("Libbre David") that don't exist anywhere. Oh, and let me point out that your explanation, that these are secret editions of the Talmud that only the initiated get to see, boils down to "Jews lie" again.
Sorry, I'm not going to be sidetracked by your supposed visits to Israel -- and let me note three things here; I am on the record numerous times as being opposed to the "settlements"; Israel has NO OIL; and neither of those topics are relevant to the SMEARS against the Talmud and the Jewish religion that you have posted here. The ONLY issue on the table is that you have posted unadulterated, proven antisemitic propaganda and outright lies about my religion and its texts.
I'm challenging you to prove the truth of these vicious lies about the Talmud with more than just repeated assertions. I'm saying here and now that you've got nothing but more antisemitic hate sites to show, more nonexistent sources and more fabricated quotes. Let me phrase it as you did: "You see it's real easy to say, "no, it's all true, those verses do exist and they're not taken out of context" but much harder to prove if you don't provide any Talmud evidence, just the views of antisemitic Jew-haters and proven liars."
All you -- and apparently, your gullible nutcase Ms. Murdock -- have done is swallow some of the most poisonous crap on the Net and regurgitate it with nothing but claims that it's accurate.
Go ahead. Prove me wrong. You can download a copy of the entire Talmud as an ebook right now; do it, and show us all where "Libbre David" is in the table of contents.
PROVE YOUR CLAIMS. As it stands now, you are BUSTED in front of everyone here.
Post #28
Do you read Hebrew? I don't. I'm pretty sure Acharya does though as her credentials for her works are always being challenged by religious apologists like you. To do her extensive research she's had to learn Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew, and that Egyptian written language whose name I can't remember, not Coptic which came later. Acharya S is D.M. Murdock's pen name, the one she goes by and you others can read about her in Wikipedia to see that she is actually fairly well known and getting more known because of the popularity of the Zeigeist films.
You know, that list of anti-Gentile statements in the Talmud is the short list. There are more and you really need to stop and think how and why right-wing bigots learn to fake so many Hebrew Talmudic verses whose structure is as obliquely bizarre as those in the Quran, no easy feat for anyone except dedicated Hebrew scholars and right-wingers have never been known as such. Perhaps it is you who are the victim of religious propaganda since you are taking your beliefs from Jewish pro-Zionist sources that have a vested interest in keeping you in the dark about Jewish racism being practiced by Jews in Israel where the core Jewish beliefs are allowed to manifest.
You know, that list of anti-Gentile statements in the Talmud is the short list. There are more and you really need to stop and think how and why right-wing bigots learn to fake so many Hebrew Talmudic verses whose structure is as obliquely bizarre as those in the Quran, no easy feat for anyone except dedicated Hebrew scholars and right-wingers have never been known as such. Perhaps it is you who are the victim of religious propaganda since you are taking your beliefs from Jewish pro-Zionist sources that have a vested interest in keeping you in the dark about Jewish racism being practiced by Jews in Israel where the core Jewish beliefs are allowed to manifest.
-
cnorman18
Post #29
In other words: you're standing by this nut job "authority" and hiding behind your repeated claim that "Jews lie."
These falsehoods don't require "scholarship." I believe l've already shown that these Jew-baiting fabrications are very clumsy ones, with references that are meaningless or actually refer to other books not in the Talmud at all; and how strange that your "scholar" doesn't know that. Even stranger that you still claim this tripe is credible, when it's so obviously false and bigoted. But the quality of your "authority" doesn't really matter in the end, does it?
Whether or not a given document contains a given statement is a matter of FACT, not of opinion. The burden of proof is on the person who makes the positive claim.
Therefore, it is up to you to provide documentation of these statements. Appealing to a suspiciously obscure and doubtful "authority" simply will not do, especially when her "references" and "quotes" are word-for-word identical, even in their order and misspellings, to others found on inarguably antisemitic hate sites -- for example, here, here, and here. Notice that the fake numbering and odd spellings of the "references" are identical, and all include the nonexistent "Libbre David 37."
Unfortunately for this sort of thing, the Talmud is now available online, here. Another translation, which is not complete but contains many of the tractates supposedly referenced in your quotes (including Sanhedrin, Baba Kama and Abuda Zara) is here.
Find and post links to your alleged quotes so we can examine them in context -- those that actually exist, that is -- or withdraw your claims. Oh, and see if you can find "Libbre David" in there anywhere.
If you want to claim that this, or any other, version of the Talmud is edited, abridged, altered or falsified, provide documentation and proof of that claim as well -- from a credible and academically respectable source.
Anybody else out there have an opinion on these "Talmud quotations"? I suggest that someone start a poll -- authentic, maybe authentic, doubtful, or obviously false -- and do it in the AA room, so biomystic can't claim he's being shouted down by "religious apologists."
These falsehoods don't require "scholarship." I believe l've already shown that these Jew-baiting fabrications are very clumsy ones, with references that are meaningless or actually refer to other books not in the Talmud at all; and how strange that your "scholar" doesn't know that. Even stranger that you still claim this tripe is credible, when it's so obviously false and bigoted. But the quality of your "authority" doesn't really matter in the end, does it?
Whether or not a given document contains a given statement is a matter of FACT, not of opinion. The burden of proof is on the person who makes the positive claim.
Therefore, it is up to you to provide documentation of these statements. Appealing to a suspiciously obscure and doubtful "authority" simply will not do, especially when her "references" and "quotes" are word-for-word identical, even in their order and misspellings, to others found on inarguably antisemitic hate sites -- for example, here, here, and here. Notice that the fake numbering and odd spellings of the "references" are identical, and all include the nonexistent "Libbre David 37."
Unfortunately for this sort of thing, the Talmud is now available online, here. Another translation, which is not complete but contains many of the tractates supposedly referenced in your quotes (including Sanhedrin, Baba Kama and Abuda Zara) is here.
Find and post links to your alleged quotes so we can examine them in context -- those that actually exist, that is -- or withdraw your claims. Oh, and see if you can find "Libbre David" in there anywhere.
If you want to claim that this, or any other, version of the Talmud is edited, abridged, altered or falsified, provide documentation and proof of that claim as well -- from a credible and academically respectable source.
Anybody else out there have an opinion on these "Talmud quotations"? I suggest that someone start a poll -- authentic, maybe authentic, doubtful, or obviously false -- and do it in the AA room, so biomystic can't claim he's being shouted down by "religious apologists."
-
otseng
- Savant
- Posts: 20983
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
- Location: Atlanta, GA
- Has thanked: 218 times
- Been thanked: 393 times
- Contact:
Post #30
Moderator Intervention
If one is going to make claims (particularly any potentially libelous claims against any belief system), hard evidence will need to be presented. What that means is that links will need to be provided to primary sources. If a claim is made that something is in the Talmud, a link needs to be provided to a translation of the Talmud. Or at a minimum, a bibliographic reference with the author, title, publisher/date, and page number. If none of these are provided, then it would be considered an unsupported claim and will need to be retracted.
______________
Moderator interventions do not count as a strike against any posters. They are given at the discretion of a moderator when he or she feels that some sort of intervention is required.
If one is going to make claims (particularly any potentially libelous claims against any belief system), hard evidence will need to be presented. What that means is that links will need to be provided to primary sources. If a claim is made that something is in the Talmud, a link needs to be provided to a translation of the Talmud. Or at a minimum, a bibliographic reference with the author, title, publisher/date, and page number. If none of these are provided, then it would be considered an unsupported claim and will need to be retracted.
______________
Moderator interventions do not count as a strike against any posters. They are given at the discretion of a moderator when he or she feels that some sort of intervention is required.
