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.)
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.)