and man’s laws were like, “ a woman can have sex with a dog as long as there were no witnesses.”
Sarah Silverman’s humor is 100% Jewish. Totally gross.
Edit: Let me be more accurate
Rulings of the "sages" follow: "A woman who had intercourse with a beast is eligible to marry a priest — even a High Priest." Unless specifically warned in advance and the act seen by two witnesses, she is acceptable also. If she had intercourse with a dog while sweeping the floor, she is likewise reckoned to be pure, and suitable. For, "The result of such intercourse being regarded as a mere wound, and the opinion that does not regard an accidentally injured hymen as a disqualification does not regard such as intercourse either." (See Exhibit)—->
Noahide laws are for Noahides (Gentiles) to implement; they are to be the same as any other definition of moral law or natural law. The prohibition of idolatry is not to be interpreted by Jews alone, nor is the death penalty for Noahides to be administered by Jews. Gentiles have sometimes formed civil authorities that have executed individuals for criminal heresy, and that is all that's intended. OP includes:
According to the Talmud, Christianity is considered Idol worship and is punishable by death (beheaded)
Totally false. The Talmud never defines Christianity, it never distinguishes between prototrinitarianism and tritheism when it objects to polytheism, and its terms for idolaters never distinguish Christians from other Gentiles. The fact that Gentiles and not Jews are to decide definitions and punishments for idolatry among themselves is shown by a medieval source, Sefer HaIkkarim, Maamar 3:25: "One who worships idols, and refuses to carry out the seven Noachian commandments, which the stranger observes, may have his life taken, too, according to the consensus of all religions. Even the philosophers permit to take his life. Kill the one who has no religion, they say. And so the Torah also admonishes us in relation to idolaters: Thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth."
Everyone is free to consult the original text and published scholarly interpretations to see if there is any exception to my statements.
As to the particular quote above, I recall Come-And-Hear being a deliberate Muslim-bias source, as I've previously documented; but even its own quote shows by its phrasing that "intercourse with a dog while sweeping the floor" (testified as an actual case in Hitlu) is being regarded as accidental and thus the legislation is about protecting the status of women unless there are multiple witnesses to overt perversity. It's not about permission, it's about legislation not being so far-reaching as to determine this to be a death penalty yet. It's rather facile to criticize the Talmud both because one thinks its death penalties are too harsh (for clear idolatry) and because one thinks they're too lenient (for rumors of bestiality). The cultural historian recognizes them as an ordinary benchmark in the formational history of legislation, not as exceptional in either good or bad senses.
Do you have any sauce on Come and hear having a Muslim bias? Seems counterproductive when it’s a Christian perspective.
The Talmud is the final authority when it comes to Judaism and from what I’ve read sourced directly I find it rather disturbing. The followers of Judaism particularly in a fundamental sect hate Jesus Christ and it is not a secret.
Who are you really swampy? I find it interesting that you differentiate groups of people using Jew and gentile. I wouldn’t classify humans in the way of either Jew or Gentile. God’s chosen people are Christians. Called by His name. In Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek. The rest….are pagans on the wide path of destruction by their own choice.
You ask good questions. I'll withdraw my recollection that Come-And-Hear might be Muslim because I might be confusing it with another source and don't want to solve that right now by file-digging.
I'm a volunteer for Scott Lively of SwampRangers.com, and in the last year I decided there were enough Talmud misquotes on Scored that they needed their own reference page. Because when people claim to want to criticize the Talmud, but misquote it to the point of total misrepresentation, they actually contradict their stated purpose and generate empathy for the Talmud, and as you point out suspicion is very high of those who indirectly generate empathy for it. That's why I try to be as impartial about it as possible. I regularly say that those who want to criticize the Talmud should point to its gross superstitions, its antipathetic structure that repels newcomers to its casuistry, and its failed consideration for evaluating the place of non-Jews. However, these are consistent with other cultures of the period and we can't just cancel it wokely on those grounds; it needs to be evaluated like any other historical document.
Notice I said "Noahides" (all humanity) before "Gentiles", because we can agree that Abrahamic faiths believe we're all Noahides, but from the Talmudic perspective non-Jews are properly called Gentiles ethnically so it's a convenient word. I've also pointed out that, Biblically, Israelites are also goyim (usually translated Gentiles) because "two nations [goyim] are in your womb" referred to Esau and Jacob.
If your radar is up just because I said "Gentile" when we're talking about idolaters as defined by the Talmud, which means all those not worshipping the God of the Tanakh (OT), I acknowledge that fine distinctions are important, but they don't diminish the point. The Talmud creates two classes determined by whether they have the true faith (though it's largely assumed this is also ethnic); and you also create two classes, calling them "Christian" and "pagan". This is exactly the same phenomenon. But since there's only one God, there's only one true covenant people (which we also now call the invisible church, but which goes back to Adam), and the question is whether individuals are following the one God or not. Many professed Christians are not, and many people uncomfortable with visible Christianity fear God without having all the details, and this requires caution about simplified labels. God would not smite the Ninevite (child) who didn't know right from left.
The Talmud is not the final authority in Judaism, the Tanakh (OT) is. The fact that the Talmud makes many case laws (only its majority opinions are binding) on matters not covered in the OT means that the maxim arose that one should cleave to the words of the Talmud more than to the Tanakh, which can lead people astray; but there is always a maxim that however much interpretation (pilpul, drash) one does, one always must come back to the plain reading (pshat) of the inspired OT text. It's totally understandable if one finds the Talmud disturbing; the Christian patristics and the Islamic ahadith are also disturbing. But with a historical cultural lens (unwarped by memes) they all become sufficiently explicable.
It is true that many Jews have expressed hate for Jesus, such as Tovia Singer and other antimissionaries. But what shouldn't be a secret is that Judaism prefers to avoid Christianity altogether rather than to hate it. I've left it an open challenge across Scored for anyone to find a rabbi or rabbinical org (other than Ulla, 4th century) who explicitly rejects Christianity as such. My experience is that, although a number of individual Jews could be cited, every source regarded as authoritative for Rabbinical Judaism comes short of disowning Christianity, for the simple reason that rabbis are cagey and cautious in statement. In 2015 many Orthodox rabbis signed a public statement bragging about how well the popes had treated them for 50 years and that "Christianity in human history is neither an accident nor an error, but the willed divine outcome and gift to the nations." So there may be more ecumenicists among them than gatekeepers. For that reason, when I can comment on Talmudic passages or broad statements implicitly about all "followers of Judaism", I do. The sidebar inspires me to continue with high-effort accurate context. There are about a million people, estimated by a Lifeway survey easily searched, who identify as followers of Judaism but who believe that Jesus is the Messiah. Christian evangelism of Jews should take this into account and treat them like any other creative-access people rather than like an "unreachable" people.
The people in the video stated that it is. That is the point of the post. I could say that God promised the Holy Land to the descendants of Abraham. However, many people wrongly believe it was promised to just the Judeans and you can see the problems this has caused.
Are you saying your point is that people are misreading the Talmud for it to say "Christianity is punishable by death"? I always have sources myself. But here's the whole video, for those who don't bother to transcribe:
If we see the full implementation of the Noahide laws in America wouldn't that mean in a practical sense that people who quote certain passages of the Bible especially in the New Testament would be arrested and imprisoned in America? Yes, you would be killed for that; well, you could be killed for it, could be, yes.
Note, it's not attributed even to any passage in the Talmud, it's just stated as if there is a standard interpretation of Noahide laws. There isn't, because it's for Noahides to determine, which they haven't in any consistent universal way (though of course humans do this as individual nations legislating ordinarily). This would require (a) a Noahide court to exist (it doesn't), (b) the court would need to define idolatry that is punishable by beheadment, (c) and it would need to define Christianity as idolatry. "Full implementation of the Noahide laws" at this time can still be anything anyone wants it to be; it's usually interpreted as the same as ordinary moral law. We could certainly say that there are probably a hundred nations that already treat Christianity as punishable in some way under national law (states identifying with Islam, atheism, etc.) and that has nothing to do with the Talmud or Judaism but is much closer to what is intended by the Bible's description of Noahide laws in passing (e.g. Acts 15) than the wild leaps of imagination in this video.
Here's the closest we've gotten, and how far you still need to stretch to get to Noahides beheading Christians. On 2006-01-10, ten non-Jewish men met with the nascent Sanhedrin and were appointed as the "High Council of Noahides", and pledged "to uphold the Seven Laws of Noah in all their details, according to Oral Law of Moses under the guidance of the developing Sanhedrin." Right now both that Sanhedrin and that Council are little more than mordant wikis, and it appears each council member is pursuing Noahidism in his own way. Notable members include Baptist archaeologist Vendyl Jones (died 2010); Baptist Jack E. Saunders; radio host and Jones protege James D. Long (resigned 2007); and Catholic Roger Grattan. So, as the OP imagines, let's pretend this "largely inactive" bunch not only got power to rewrite American law but also totally obeyed whatever is left of the Sanhedrin (apparently under the very obscure Meir Yaakov Hakak Halevi) instead of anything the 300 million Americans have to say about the matter. Let's even pretend that this Sanhedrin decides to abuse this power and go straight to defining Christianity as idolatry, though no rabbi has ever formally done so, and though this would rather incite a rebellion among the more powerful Americans. Would that then mean the OP is correct, that the wax-nose concept "full implementation" does mean, as OP claims, you'd be killed for Christianity in America, or that this is Talmudic? The answer is no, because it wouldn't be America anymore. It wouldn't be Talmudic either because it's not in the text. It wouldn't even be reality because this hypothetical future is just as imaginary as any speculative fiction novel, probably more so, since there's no path to it in today's politics, nor in eschatology. This is all just Mike Adams making up whole cloth to earn his FRNs.
Further, here are the actual data that are getting mixed up with the idea of modern Noahidism. One of the closest Talmudic quotes to this point is Sanhedrin 57a, "With regard to idol worship, matters for which a Jewish court executes are prohibited to a descendant of Noah? Yes, a prohibition, no death." The Jewish court has no power to decide for the Noahide court, which does not use Jewish rules but its own. The whole point of Noahide courts is that they are for non-Jews, which would be illogical if they used the same rules as Jewish courts (which have 613 commands instead of 7). Second, what is the actual concern that is driving OP? It's about the "certain passages of the Bible" that are being discussed nowadays, which are the ones like 1 Thess. 2:14-15, "The Jews ... killed the Lord Jesus", that are objected to by the ADL/IHRA and that were interpreted to be in HR 6090 last year (Antisemitism Awareness, Rep. Michael Lawler, dead in Senate). That is, the presenting concern is already rejected by both sides of the aisle and there has not been any effort to renew it.
So the idea that Congress could make the New Testament a hate crime is not going anywhere, the exaggerating of this into beheadment for Christianity is purely imaginary, and the attribution of this to the Talmud is completely unsourced. The reality is that Christians are still being beheaded in other countries today and this is not on the OP's radar at all while some millennarian fiction is being driveled in lieu. Nor is this related to Levantine land claims. If we're going to criticize the Talmudic authors, the ADL, the IHRA, the High Council of Noahides, the Sanhedrin, Mike Lawler, or whomever, we should do it with accurate sourcing relating to individual entities.
Accuracy (truth) and reason (wisdom) are indeed in the process of stopping all lies. Is there any particular lie you wish stopped? Have we stopped the lie in the OP title yet? (Because if you lie like that about the Talmud it has the effect of making people more sympathetic to the Talmud and thus being perceived as a "Zionist lie". For some reason nobody ever replies to that point and agrees that we should criticize the Talmud accurately instead of wildly inaccurately.)
There are multiple major 'religions' that have at its heart this notion that terrorism and crime and atrocity, slavery and rape and genocide is allowable against people of differing views. That says that the Golden Rule is for suckas, and that people extending the hand of friendship make for the easiest targets. All by framing crime as moral and upstanding.
The original Jews? Are you talking about Abraham? Moses? Those that follow Torah, like Jesus? Maybe you meant the Edomites, who took every opportunity to pretend to follow the Torah and pretend to be Jews, like Herod, who was an Edomite.
And yet, like it or not, God has never declared that they are no longer His people. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t point out when they do wrong but I’m also not going to say that they should be persecuted and deserve death.
That would be all people who do this, regardless of which religion they profess to believe in. Would you allocate all people to death who have rejected God? There are many in today’s world who consider themselves to be good people who have not accepted God.
There are many in today’s world who consider themselves to be good people who have not accepted God.
Key word: consider.
If somebody is pedophile raping children or eating their bodies (knowingly,and knowing it is bad !), if somebody is doing blasphemies and attack against other religions especially true faith - Christianity,if somebody worship knowingly satan himself then well: that person for sure IS NOT good and deserves DEATH.
I am not kind of man who would ever like killing people. But dangerous monsters shall be slayed without mercy. Because mercy for them would be lack of mercy for their victims including innocent children.
And among those monsters are many people who call themselves jews. Sorry,but they could call themselves even fucking angels,I don't fucking care their name or ancestors,I don't fucking care their family stories and so on - all I care is what they fucking do !
The God of the Christian Bible is the same Just, Righteous God of all creation whether it's the New Testament or the TORAH (1st 5 books of the Old Testament) and the rest of the Old Testament. Both the Old and New Testaments are the inspired Word of God.
According to our "Da JOOZZ!!!" fetishists:
only the Talmud exists, and because it's deeply flawed...[and let's face it: because people don't know the difference between the Old Testament, Torah, and TALMUD],
therefore:
2."Da JOOZZ" are then vilified because the Talmud is flawed.
Bottom Line:
The Old Testament, including the Torah, and the New Testament are the inspired Word of God. The Talmud is NOT, it's only a commentary, by men, uninspired by God.
Bashing the Jews en masse because the Talmud is so flawed is like bashing Christianity because of the Jehovah's Witnesses' "Watchtower" magazine.
SO tiresome. Important distinctions are being IGNORED and ALL Jews are being vilified. Yep, there's some bad Jews. Jesus referred to them as those "who say they are Jews but are not". Some perspective is needed here.
Your analogy is flawed. You make so many assumptions that my concerned is that you’re too emotional about this topic for me to spend time showing you a logical counter.
First of all the Talmud is the Jewish authority. Most people are not bashing the Jews. It’s just that eyes have been opened to what Jesus was referring to in the book of Matthew.
Jehovah’s Witnesses are not Christians because they do not believe Jesus is the Son of God. It has nothing to do with the watchtower magazine.
The Talmud is the workaround for every law God ever commanded.
You have no idea what people here know or how they came to know it. What do you know about the Bolshevik revolution?
I might suggest you read the Bible. We are to be wise as serpents and gentile as doves. Not one without the other. God said Love your enemies. Not pretend they’re your friend.
"From the birth of Jesus until this day there have never been recorded more vicious and vile libelous blasphemies of Jesus, or Christians and the Christian faith by anyone, anywhere, or anytime than you will find between the covers of the infamous "63 books" (of the Talmud) which are "the legal code which forms the basis of Jewish religious law" as well as the "textbook used in the training of rabbis". The explicit and implicit irreligious character and implications of the contents of the Talmud will open your eyes as they have never been opened before. The Talmud reviles Jesus, Christians and the Christian faith as the priceless spiritual and cultural heritage of Christians has never been reviled before or since the Talmud was completed in the 5th century." - Benjamin H Freedman, referring to passages from the Talmud, as quoted in his booklet 'Facts are Facts' - 1954
Unfortunately, the quote is totally opinionated. There were certainly many more vicious, vile, libelous blasphemies before 1954, starting with Celsus and going all the way to LaVey. Even the medieval Jewish blasphemy of Jesus, such as Toledot Yeshu, is much worse than the Talmud. The objection of the Talmud to idolaters and its very occasional references to formative Christianity are typical for their day and not much different from polemics in other splits among Semitic people.
I thought naming three sources was enough to illustrate the discussion space. Ultimately since the quote itself is about subjective statements of opinion as to what's "more" vile, perhaps I shouldn't have stepped in at all; but having seen the worst of what's proposed as Talmudic blasphemy, and quite a lot of what's proposed since then as blasphemy, it seems a straightforward judgment.
What's the worst blasphemy in the Talmud? To say there was a Yeshu, officially the son of Pappos in the 2nd century AD, and whose mother was promiscuous? That's Shabbat 104b: "Husband Pappos ben Yehuda? Rather, his mother Stada. His mother Miriam, who braided women's hair? Rather, as they say in Pumbedita: This strayed from her husband." It's pretty difficult to parse, but I've succeeded. However, the blasphemy recorded in the NT, "We're not bastards [like you]" (John 8:41), is much worse and more direct and more topical and better-attested.
Since the Hebrew for Christ is Messiah and since all Talmudists think venerably of the Messiah, the Talmud never uses a word like "Christian" to my knowledge; that's why the passages about idolaters always link non-Jews without discerning Christians or non-Christians. [You could except Sanhedrin 43a, which is not about idolatry directly but is mostly historically accurate about Jesus, whom it says was hung (on a tree) at Passover and had disciples who were martyred for their faith in him.]
If you actually get the correct text, most alleged "blasphemies" are not actually what people lately say they are due to the telephone game.
Here is a fantastic resource from Elizabeth Dilling- she was slated to be the world’s best harpist by training under the world’s best harpist in the Soviet Union. So appalled by what she saw (virulent anti Christian communism) she quit her career to speak out against communism and as we have learned The Talmud revealed itself. ENJOY!
http://www.come-and-hear.com/dilling/dcontents.html#V
Now you know why Jesus was so upset with the religious leaders. They followed the traditions of men (Talmud) rather than God's laws.
and man’s laws were like, “ a woman can have sex with a dog as long as there were no witnesses.” Sarah Silverman’s humor is 100% Jewish. Totally gross. Edit: Let me be more accurate
http://www.come-and-hear.com/dilling/158.html
Source BrightEon is Mike Adams HealthRanger bias.
Noahide laws are for Noahides (Gentiles) to implement; they are to be the same as any other definition of moral law or natural law. The prohibition of idolatry is not to be interpreted by Jews alone, nor is the death penalty for Noahides to be administered by Jews. Gentiles have sometimes formed civil authorities that have executed individuals for criminal heresy, and that is all that's intended. OP includes:
Totally false. The Talmud never defines Christianity, it never distinguishes between prototrinitarianism and tritheism when it objects to polytheism, and its terms for idolaters never distinguish Christians from other Gentiles. The fact that Gentiles and not Jews are to decide definitions and punishments for idolatry among themselves is shown by a medieval source, Sefer HaIkkarim, Maamar 3:25: "One who worships idols, and refuses to carry out the seven Noachian commandments, which the stranger observes, may have his life taken, too, according to the consensus of all religions. Even the philosophers permit to take his life. Kill the one who has no religion, they say. And so the Torah also admonishes us in relation to idolaters: Thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth."
Everyone is free to consult the original text and published scholarly interpretations to see if there is any exception to my statements.
As to the particular quote above,
I recall Come-And-Hear being a deliberate Muslim-bias source, as I've previously documented; buteven its own quote shows by its phrasing that "intercourse with a dog while sweeping the floor" (testified as an actual case in Hitlu) is being regarded as accidental and thus the legislation is about protecting the status of women unless there are multiple witnesses to overt perversity. It's not about permission, it's about legislation not being so far-reaching as to determine this to be a death penalty yet. It's rather facile to criticize the Talmud both because one thinks its death penalties are too harsh (for clear idolatry) and because one thinks they're too lenient (for rumors of bestiality). The cultural historian recognizes them as an ordinary benchmark in the formational history of legislation, not as exceptional in either good or bad senses.u/BooniesRedneck u/Hortance u/NeilS
And you think I need to read this because?
Do you have any sauce on Come and hear having a Muslim bias? Seems counterproductive when it’s a Christian perspective.
The Talmud is the final authority when it comes to Judaism and from what I’ve read sourced directly I find it rather disturbing. The followers of Judaism particularly in a fundamental sect hate Jesus Christ and it is not a secret.
Who are you really swampy? I find it interesting that you differentiate groups of people using Jew and gentile. I wouldn’t classify humans in the way of either Jew or Gentile. God’s chosen people are Christians. Called by His name. In Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek. The rest….are pagans on the wide path of destruction by their own choice.
You ask good questions. I'll withdraw my recollection that Come-And-Hear might be Muslim because I might be confusing it with another source and don't want to solve that right now by file-digging.
I'm a volunteer for Scott Lively of SwampRangers.com, and in the last year I decided there were enough Talmud misquotes on Scored that they needed their own reference page. Because when people claim to want to criticize the Talmud, but misquote it to the point of total misrepresentation, they actually contradict their stated purpose and generate empathy for the Talmud, and as you point out suspicion is very high of those who indirectly generate empathy for it. That's why I try to be as impartial about it as possible. I regularly say that those who want to criticize the Talmud should point to its gross superstitions, its antipathetic structure that repels newcomers to its casuistry, and its failed consideration for evaluating the place of non-Jews. However, these are consistent with other cultures of the period and we can't just cancel it wokely on those grounds; it needs to be evaluated like any other historical document.
Notice I said "Noahides" (all humanity) before "Gentiles", because we can agree that Abrahamic faiths believe we're all Noahides, but from the Talmudic perspective non-Jews are properly called Gentiles ethnically so it's a convenient word. I've also pointed out that, Biblically, Israelites are also goyim (usually translated Gentiles) because "two nations [goyim] are in your womb" referred to Esau and Jacob.
If your radar is up just because I said "Gentile" when we're talking about idolaters as defined by the Talmud, which means all those not worshipping the God of the Tanakh (OT), I acknowledge that fine distinctions are important, but they don't diminish the point. The Talmud creates two classes determined by whether they have the true faith (though it's largely assumed this is also ethnic); and you also create two classes, calling them "Christian" and "pagan". This is exactly the same phenomenon. But since there's only one God, there's only one true covenant people (which we also now call the invisible church, but which goes back to Adam), and the question is whether individuals are following the one God or not. Many professed Christians are not, and many people uncomfortable with visible Christianity fear God without having all the details, and this requires caution about simplified labels. God would not smite the Ninevite (child) who didn't know right from left.
The Talmud is not the final authority in Judaism, the Tanakh (OT) is. The fact that the Talmud makes many case laws (only its majority opinions are binding) on matters not covered in the OT means that the maxim arose that one should cleave to the words of the Talmud more than to the Tanakh, which can lead people astray; but there is always a maxim that however much interpretation (pilpul, drash) one does, one always must come back to the plain reading (pshat) of the inspired OT text. It's totally understandable if one finds the Talmud disturbing; the Christian patristics and the Islamic ahadith are also disturbing. But with a historical cultural lens (unwarped by memes) they all become sufficiently explicable.
It is true that many Jews have expressed hate for Jesus, such as Tovia Singer and other antimissionaries. But what shouldn't be a secret is that Judaism prefers to avoid Christianity altogether rather than to hate it. I've left it an open challenge across Scored for anyone to find a rabbi or rabbinical org (other than Ulla, 4th century) who explicitly rejects Christianity as such. My experience is that, although a number of individual Jews could be cited, every source regarded as authoritative for Rabbinical Judaism comes short of disowning Christianity, for the simple reason that rabbis are cagey and cautious in statement. In 2015 many Orthodox rabbis signed a public statement bragging about how well the popes had treated them for 50 years and that "Christianity in human history is neither an accident nor an error, but the willed divine outcome and gift to the nations." So there may be more ecumenicists among them than gatekeepers. For that reason, when I can comment on Talmudic passages or broad statements implicitly about all "followers of Judaism", I do. The sidebar inspires me to continue with high-effort accurate context. There are about a million people, estimated by a Lifeway survey easily searched, who identify as followers of Judaism but who believe that Jesus is the Messiah. Christian evangelism of Jews should take this into account and treat them like any other creative-access people rather than like an "unreachable" people.
The people in the video stated that it is. That is the point of the post. I could say that God promised the Holy Land to the descendants of Abraham. However, many people wrongly believe it was promised to just the Judeans and you can see the problems this has caused.
Are you saying your point is that people are misreading the Talmud for it to say "Christianity is punishable by death"? I always have sources myself. But here's the whole video, for those who don't bother to transcribe:
Note, it's not attributed even to any passage in the Talmud, it's just stated as if there is a standard interpretation of Noahide laws. There isn't, because it's for Noahides to determine, which they haven't in any consistent universal way (though of course humans do this as individual nations legislating ordinarily). This would require (a) a Noahide court to exist (it doesn't), (b) the court would need to define idolatry that is punishable by beheadment, (c) and it would need to define Christianity as idolatry. "Full implementation of the Noahide laws" at this time can still be anything anyone wants it to be; it's usually interpreted as the same as ordinary moral law. We could certainly say that there are probably a hundred nations that already treat Christianity as punishable in some way under national law (states identifying with Islam, atheism, etc.) and that has nothing to do with the Talmud or Judaism but is much closer to what is intended by the Bible's description of Noahide laws in passing (e.g. Acts 15) than the wild leaps of imagination in this video.
Here's the closest we've gotten, and how far you still need to stretch to get to Noahides beheading Christians. On 2006-01-10, ten non-Jewish men met with the nascent Sanhedrin and were appointed as the "High Council of Noahides", and pledged "to uphold the Seven Laws of Noah in all their details, according to Oral Law of Moses under the guidance of the developing Sanhedrin." Right now both that Sanhedrin and that Council are little more than mordant wikis, and it appears each council member is pursuing Noahidism in his own way. Notable members include Baptist archaeologist Vendyl Jones (died 2010); Baptist Jack E. Saunders; radio host and Jones protege James D. Long (resigned 2007); and Catholic Roger Grattan. So, as the OP imagines, let's pretend this "largely inactive" bunch not only got power to rewrite American law but also totally obeyed whatever is left of the Sanhedrin (apparently under the very obscure Meir Yaakov Hakak Halevi) instead of anything the 300 million Americans have to say about the matter. Let's even pretend that this Sanhedrin decides to abuse this power and go straight to defining Christianity as idolatry, though no rabbi has ever formally done so, and though this would rather incite a rebellion among the more powerful Americans. Would that then mean the OP is correct, that the wax-nose concept "full implementation" does mean, as OP claims, you'd be killed for Christianity in America, or that this is Talmudic? The answer is no, because it wouldn't be America anymore. It wouldn't be Talmudic either because it's not in the text. It wouldn't even be reality because this hypothetical future is just as imaginary as any speculative fiction novel, probably more so, since there's no path to it in today's politics, nor in eschatology. This is all just Mike Adams making up whole cloth to earn his FRNs.
Further, here are the actual data that are getting mixed up with the idea of modern Noahidism. One of the closest Talmudic quotes to this point is Sanhedrin 57a, "With regard to idol worship, matters for which a Jewish court executes are prohibited to a descendant of Noah? Yes, a prohibition, no death." The Jewish court has no power to decide for the Noahide court, which does not use Jewish rules but its own. The whole point of Noahide courts is that they are for non-Jews, which would be illogical if they used the same rules as Jewish courts (which have 613 commands instead of 7). Second, what is the actual concern that is driving OP? It's about the "certain passages of the Bible" that are being discussed nowadays, which are the ones like 1 Thess. 2:14-15, "The Jews ... killed the Lord Jesus", that are objected to by the ADL/IHRA and that were interpreted to be in HR 6090 last year (Antisemitism Awareness, Rep. Michael Lawler, dead in Senate). That is, the presenting concern is already rejected by both sides of the aisle and there has not been any effort to renew it.
So the idea that Congress could make the New Testament a hate crime is not going anywhere, the exaggerating of this into beheadment for Christianity is purely imaginary, and the attribution of this to the Talmud is completely unsourced. The reality is that Christians are still being beheaded in other countries today and this is not on the OP's radar at all while some millennarian fiction is being driveled in lieu. Nor is this related to Levantine land claims. If we're going to criticize the Talmudic authors, the ADL, the IHRA, the High Council of Noahides, the Sanhedrin, Mike Lawler, or whomever, we should do it with accurate sourcing relating to individual entities.
Has accuracy and reason stopped the Zionist lies?
Accuracy (truth) and reason (wisdom) are indeed in the process of stopping all lies. Is there any particular lie you wish stopped? Have we stopped the lie in the OP title yet? (Because if you lie like that about the Talmud it has the effect of making people more sympathetic to the Talmud and thus being perceived as a "Zionist lie". For some reason nobody ever replies to that point and agrees that we should criticize the Talmud accurately instead of wildly inaccurately.)
It was written hundreds of years after Christ, mostly by those that have no bloodlines to the Biblical Hebrews.
It's literally new religion by different bloodline claiming to be the original one
There are multiple major 'religions' that have at its heart this notion that terrorism and crime and atrocity, slavery and rape and genocide is allowable against people of differing views. That says that the Golden Rule is for suckas, and that people extending the hand of friendship make for the easiest targets. All by framing crime as moral and upstanding.
Actually it's just two of them. Which is really one and the same (satanism).
The original (jews) and their cousins/stormtroopers (muslims).
The original Jews? Are you talking about Abraham? Moses? Those that follow Torah, like Jesus? Maybe you meant the Edomites, who took every opportunity to pretend to follow the Torah and pretend to be Jews, like Herod, who was an Edomite.
The entirety of Judaism is that of the Pharisee. The Sadducees dissolved or became born again—> Christian.
The Talmud is now that absolute authority for the Jewish religion.
And yet, like it or not, God has never declared that they are no longer His people. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t point out when they do wrong but I’m also not going to say that they should be persecuted and deserve death.
That’s interesting, did someone in this thread suggest Jews should be persecuted and deserve death?
Well,maybe not all,but those of them who rejected God,worship satan,do blasphemies and rape children definitely deserve death.
That would be all people who do this, regardless of which religion they profess to believe in. Would you allocate all people to death who have rejected God? There are many in today’s world who consider themselves to be good people who have not accepted God.
Key word: consider.
If somebody is pedophile raping children or eating their bodies (knowingly,and knowing it is bad !), if somebody is doing blasphemies and attack against other religions especially true faith - Christianity,if somebody worship knowingly satan himself then well: that person for sure IS NOT good and deserves DEATH.
I am not kind of man who would ever like killing people. But dangerous monsters shall be slayed without mercy. Because mercy for them would be lack of mercy for their victims including innocent children.
And among those monsters are many people who call themselves jews. Sorry,but they could call themselves even fucking angels,I don't fucking care their name or ancestors,I don't fucking care their family stories and so on - all I care is what they fucking do !
Do you mean reject God or his son Jesus Christ? There is no God without Jesus- Yeshua Hamashiach.
That' why they worship an idol. The Western Wall
Momma didn't raise no sucka here. This one fights back. Hard.
u/#teflondon
You were made for this comment, at this time, at this place.
NCSWIC
No, there really isn't.
Perhaps you should read the Talmud.
Meanwhile you can't draw a picture of Mohammed, because idol worship
I don't want to see pictures of pedophiles either....just sayin'
The God of the Christian Bible is the same Just, Righteous God of all creation whether it's the New Testament or the TORAH (1st 5 books of the Old Testament) and the rest of the Old Testament. Both the Old and New Testaments are the inspired Word of God.
According to our "Da JOOZZ!!!" fetishists:
therefore:
2."Da JOOZZ" are then vilified because the Talmud is flawed.
Bottom Line:
The Old Testament, including the Torah, and the New Testament are the inspired Word of God. The Talmud is NOT, it's only a commentary, by men, uninspired by God.
Bashing the Jews en masse because the Talmud is so flawed is like bashing Christianity because of the Jehovah's Witnesses' "Watchtower" magazine.
SO tiresome. Important distinctions are being IGNORED and ALL Jews are being vilified. Yep, there's some bad Jews. Jesus referred to them as those "who say they are Jews but are not". Some perspective is needed here.
Which Jews are the ones that are on YouTube and such that spit on Christians or people openly wearing a cross necklace and such? Seriously asking.
Which Jews are speaking out against all the hate and killing of Christians? Seriously asking as well.
Your analogy is flawed. You make so many assumptions that my concerned is that you’re too emotional about this topic for me to spend time showing you a logical counter. First of all the Talmud is the Jewish authority. Most people are not bashing the Jews. It’s just that eyes have been opened to what Jesus was referring to in the book of Matthew. Jehovah’s Witnesses are not Christians because they do not believe Jesus is the Son of God. It has nothing to do with the watchtower magazine.
The Talmud is the workaround for every law God ever commanded.
You have no idea what people here know or how they came to know it. What do you know about the Bolshevik revolution?
I might suggest you read the Bible. We are to be wise as serpents and gentile as doves. Not one without the other. God said Love your enemies. Not pretend they’re your friend.
"The Talmud is the workaround for every law God ever commanded."
Pilpul, it's called. Scholarly hair-splitting.
POTEOZ.
https://educate-yourself.org/cn/Jewish_World_Conspiracy_1938_Karl_Bergmeister.pdf
"From the birth of Jesus until this day there have never been recorded more vicious and vile libelous blasphemies of Jesus, or Christians and the Christian faith by anyone, anywhere, or anytime than you will find between the covers of the infamous "63 books" (of the Talmud) which are "the legal code which forms the basis of Jewish religious law" as well as the "textbook used in the training of rabbis". The explicit and implicit irreligious character and implications of the contents of the Talmud will open your eyes as they have never been opened before. The Talmud reviles Jesus, Christians and the Christian faith as the priceless spiritual and cultural heritage of Christians has never been reviled before or since the Talmud was completed in the 5th century." - Benjamin H Freedman, referring to passages from the Talmud, as quoted in his booklet 'Facts are Facts' - 1954
Unfortunately, the quote is totally opinionated. There were certainly many more vicious, vile, libelous blasphemies before 1954, starting with Celsus and going all the way to LaVey. Even the medieval Jewish blasphemy of Jesus, such as Toledot Yeshu, is much worse than the Talmud. The objection of the Talmud to idolaters and its very occasional references to formative Christianity are typical for their day and not much different from polemics in other splits among Semitic people.
Do you have any sauce at all? Without sauce you are totally opinionated
I thought naming three sources was enough to illustrate the discussion space. Ultimately since the quote itself is about subjective statements of opinion as to what's "more" vile, perhaps I shouldn't have stepped in at all; but having seen the worst of what's proposed as Talmudic blasphemy, and quite a lot of what's proposed since then as blasphemy, it seems a straightforward judgment.
What's the worst blasphemy in the Talmud? To say there was a Yeshu, officially the son of Pappos in the 2nd century AD, and whose mother was promiscuous? That's Shabbat 104b: "Husband Pappos ben Yehuda? Rather, his mother Stada. His mother Miriam, who braided women's hair? Rather, as they say in Pumbedita: This strayed from her husband." It's pretty difficult to parse, but I've succeeded. However, the blasphemy recorded in the NT, "We're not bastards [like you]" (John 8:41), is much worse and more direct and more topical and better-attested.
Since the Hebrew for Christ is Messiah and since all Talmudists think venerably of the Messiah, the Talmud never uses a word like "Christian" to my knowledge; that's why the passages about idolaters always link non-Jews without discerning Christians or non-Christians. [You could except Sanhedrin 43a, which is not about idolatry directly but is mostly historically accurate about Jesus, whom it says was hung (on a tree) at Passover and had disciples who were martyred for their faith in him.]
If you actually get the correct text, most alleged "blasphemies" are not actually what people lately say they are due to the telephone game.
Here is a fantastic resource from Elizabeth Dilling- she was slated to be the world’s best harpist by training under the world’s best harpist in the Soviet Union. So appalled by what she saw (virulent anti Christian communism) she quit her career to speak out against communism and as we have learned The Talmud revealed itself. ENJOY! http://www.come-and-hear.com/dilling/dcontents.html#V