Talmud divides all of humanity into two parts: Jews and non-Jews

Originally posted by jagdflieger
Illmatic67
I don't think you have a single clue as to what is truly written in the Talmud. Have you personally read it? Where are you quotes? All you really have to rely on are the rantings of you Islamic buddies and I really do not believe that they could be considered reliable sources concerning what is written in the Talmud.

Islamic rantings?

You damn fool

I knew someone would throw Islam into this right when my name got involved.

FYI, I have read the Talmud, and have you read this thread? Skadi posted few quotes from the Talmud couple of posts above us.

Have you ever read the Qur'an? The non-propaganda-anti Islamic Qur'an?

Illmatic,

You should have waited a few seconds more before backing Skadi. Skadi has quoted nothing from the Talmud...and obviously you haven't read it either.

Ok, I have calmed down a LITTLE...

Exactly WHAT PART OF SKADI'S POST is from the Talmud?!?!?!?!?!?!

Try BOOKS... NOT hate filled websites.

P...
m...

Anyone can go to some website, knowing nothing about anything, and get some info- which is what you did Valhall.

Now I have idiots u2ing me talking a whole bunch of nonsense as if they know me.

I've read the Talmud, I know what it says

It says blacks are the cursed people of Ham.

I don't know what Talmud's you have read. The quotes that Skadi posted were the same ones I read. The Talmud I read came from a Jew's house.

Yebamoth 98a- All gentile children are animals....

No Illmatic, don't blame your own sins on me. I did not use a SINGLE website to respond.

You have NOT read the "non-propaganda version" of the Talmud. NOTHING in Skadi's post pertains to the Talmud. NOTHING. Not a single syllable. And the longer you put yourself behind those lies, the lower you look.

I aint doin' it...you are.

I know it's painful to find out you are wrong and HAVE BEEN wrong for a long time, but deal with the pain and get real.

I am the idiot that U2Ued you, thank you very much... You are COMPLETELY ILLITERATE if you think this is the Talmud.

I mean that in a caring way... I Care because I don't want you to STAY ILLITERATE on subjects you attempt to show yourself as knowledgable about... It just doesn't do well for your cause...(WHAT IS your cause anyway? Global Domination? You'll NEVER beat the capitalists! We have ALL the MONEY!)

I don't care WHOSE "house" you got your Talmud from... It was NOT the Talmud.

I studied under a PHD'd Rabbi NOT some Obscure "Jew" who had a house...

RESEARCH... BOOKS... NOT Antisemitism websites man!

You are TRULY COMICAL!

[Edited on 9-15-2003 by Springer]

Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Yebamoth

Folio 98a
but that a [Rabbinical] prohibition is 'nevertheless involved!1 � The law, in fact, is that even a [Rabbinical] prohibition is not involved; only, because it was desired to state in the final clause, 'but are guilty [of a punishable offence]', it was stated in the first clause also, 'they are not guilty [of a punishable offence]'.

Raba stated: With reference to the Rabbinical statement that [legally] an Egyptian has no father,2 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 known3 it is to be taken into consideration;4 but [the fact is] that even if this is known it is not taken into consideration. For, surely, in respect of twin brothers, who originated in one drop that divided itself into two, it was nevertheless stated in the final clause,5 that they 'neither participate in halizah nor perform levirate marriage'.6 Thus it may be inferred that the All Merciful declared their children to be legally fatherless,7 for [so indeed it is also] written, Whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses.8

Come and hear what R. Jose related: It once happened with the proselyte Niphates9 that he married the wife of his [deceased]10 maternal brother,11 and when the case was submitted to the Sages their verdict was that the law of matrimony does not apply to a proselyte. But then, should a proselyte betroth a woman, would also the betrothal be invalid? � Say then rather: The prohibition of a brother's wife does not apply to a proselyte. Now does not [this refer to the case] where his brother11 had married her while he was a proselyte!12 � No; where he married her while he was still an idolater.13 But if [betrothal took place] while he was still an idolater, what [need is there] to state it?14 � It might have been assumed that [in the case of a brother's betrothal] while he is still an idolater a preventive measure should be enacted lest [erroneous conclusions be drawn in the case] where he is a proselyte, hence we were taught [that no such measure was enacted].

Come and hear what Ben Yasyan15 related: When I went to the coastal towns16 I came across a certain proselyte who had married the wife of his maternal brother. 'Who, my son', I said to him, 'permitted you [this marriage]?' 'Behold', he replied. 'the woman and her seven children;17 on this bench sat R. Akiba when he made two statements: "A proselyte may marry the wife of his maternal brother", and he also stated, "And the word of the Lord came unto Jonah the second time, saying,18 only a second time did the Shechinah speak to him; a third time the Shechinah did not speak to him."'19 At any rate, it was stated here that 'a proselyte may marry the wife of his maternal brother'. Does not [this refer to a case] where his brother married her while he was a proselyte! � No; where he married her while he was still an idolater.20 What [need then was there] to state [such an obvious law]? � It might have been assumed that [in the case of a brother's betrothal] while he is still an idolater a preventive measure should be enacted lest [erroneous conclusions be drawn in the case] where he is a proselyte. hence we were taught [that no such measure was enacted].

Is he,21 however, believed? Surely R. Abba stated in the name of R. Huna in the name of Rab: Wherever a scholar gives directions22 on a point of law and such a point comes up for a practical decision, he is obeyed if he made the statement23 before the event;24 but if it was not so made, he is not obeyed!25 � If you wish I might say: The incident occurred after he made his statement. If you prefer, I might say: Because he stated, 'Behold the woman and her seven children'.26 And if you prefer I might say: Here it is different27 because with it he related another incident.28

The Master said, 'And the word of the Lord came to Jonah a second time, saying,29 only a second time did the Shechinah speak unto him, a third time the Shechinah did not speak to him'. But surely it is written in Scripture, He restored the border of Israel from the entrance of Hamath unto the sea of the Arabah, according to the word of the Lord, which He spoke by the hand of His servant Jonah the son of Amittai, the prophet!30 � Rabina replied: He31 referred to the affairs of Nineveh.

If you all want to read an English version on-line of the Babylonian Talmud
www.come-and-hear.com...

Also I have a hard time believing that anyone under the age of 25 has read the Talmud (maybe they have read parts of it). I can point you to a web site where you could purchase the 72 volumes of the Schottenstein Edition Talmud Bavli (when they become all available in 2004). Note 72 volumes.

Originally posted by Illmatic67
I've read the Talmud, I know what it says

It says blacks are the cursed people of Ham.

I don't know what Talmud's you have read. The quotes that Skadi posted were the same ones I read. The Talmud I read came from a Jew's house.

Yebamoth 98a- All gentile children are animals....

You read it? I doubt that.

The Talmud is huge, and there is more than one. It's not a book you can read in a few days. Imagine a very large set of encyclopedia. People spend their lives studying it.

What can I say? Jews write a lot.

here's a link to an explanation of what seems to be an out of control issue .....

www.angelfire.com...

I dont know how accurate this site is.....
helen...



[Edited on 9/15/2003 by helen670]

Good find, Helen! Here is another site that refutes most slanders against the Talmud:

www.adl.org...

The problem is that people find old books and documents which should have slipped into total oblivion and then publish them on the Internet to give them some new life and some new following. The problem occurs when people read these documents and take them as being representative of truth without doing any reasearch as to the validty of what is being said.

Like the bible?

Val, and Springer,

Are you aware that more than one version of the Talmud exists? The Talmud has been edited, there are several versions. Perhaps you read one of the...edited versions.

www.amazon.com...

Israel Shahak was a Jewish Professor and a Bergen belsen Concentration camp survivor who became a rabbid critic of Israel and Zionism. According to his many books, the Talmud WAS edited. There are I believe, two or three versions of it in existance. He was bonr and Raised an orthodox Jew. I would say HE IS an expert in this area. According to him, the above excerpts I have posted are true.

Ben Freedman is another renegade Jew who cobverted to Christianity and basically felt it his Christian duty to point out the hateful passages of the Talmud that are anti Gentile and anti Christian, from refernces of jesus burning in hell in excrement to the Virgin Mary being a hairdresser and a whore.

Like all relgions, however, Judism is a divided one. There were a number of Jews who found the old Talmud so offensive they broke away from it and created rebel sects. Not all Jews follow the unedited Talmud. But there are those who do.

My point here, is to say that "Jews" Hate Gentiles and think them subhuman based on text written by KNOWN AntiSemites is simply WRONG.

There is ONE Talmud that has been constantly updated for OVER 2000 years. Every religion/group has had its biggoted pigs and the Jews are no exception.

The reality is the Biggoted Pigs ARE the exception in Judaism. The statement that there is more than one Talmud is simply false.

There may be COPIES of the Talmud that have been doctored to fit this group or that group's purposes but there is only ONE Talmud that is kept up by the Talmudic Rabbis...

Let's take the word "Goy" for example, it translates to English as "Person of a Nation". NOT cow or animal.

These arguments have been going on for centuries and nobody is ever going to end them. The Jews have a document that has been kept up for 2000 years faithfully. That document is the Talmud. The Talmud is Judaism's on-going commentary about life, religion, law and society. Many have taken things written a thousand years ago out of context and mist translated them to fit their twisted aims.

Your "sources" unfortunately are two of them, IMHO. That's my opinion, it is NOT a fact. I can't say factually that these two have an agenda other than the truth because I can't read their hearts or minds, BUT I CAN state that after intellectually reviewing their writings it strikes me that they have an agenda that is other than the truth.

PEACE...
m...

Number 1) Not one of you has read the entire Talmud. If you read one double-sided page per day (which is the way it is prescribed to be learned) it takes seven years to learn in it's entirety. NONE of you has done this. Without reading the entire thing you are hardly an "authority" on talmudic writings.

Number 2) Not one of you - even the genius illmatic who vaguely claims to have "read the talmud" - can legitimately read one word of Aramaic, THE LANGUAGE IT WAS WRITTEN IN. I don't care what you're reading in English, you don't know # about it when you read watered down and altered translations.

The authors did not translate it into english. Later "historians" did. The talmud is a discourse. Have you all forgotten what that is? It's a discussion. A discussion of right points and wrong points. It is not a "guideline to live by". It's arguments. Back and forth arguments for thousands upon thousands of pages. It is a collection of debates. Most of the time it does not list who is right. That is up to the person reading it to analyze and decide for themselves. That is why ignorant close minded #s are not supposed to be reading it. That is why ignorant close minded #s misunderstand it.

Judaism does not teach the Talmud to children who do not already have advanced understanding of the Written Tradition aka the Torah and the real "guidelines for living" or "Halakha". But self righteous cattle writing asinine articles about it don't mention that.

Why put off the learning of the Talmud until other things are perfected? SO THAT THE JEWISH STUDENT LEARNING THE TALMUD IS ABLE TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN RIGHT AND WRONG, AND BETWEEN THEORY AND REALITY. That is why jews do not hold by these pitiful things you peopel enjoy quoting so much

You are all missing that. What it says is not relevant. You decided it says killing a non-jew is ok? Well guess what? That opinion was proved wrong 2 pages further down and if your ignorant asses would put real effort into this you'd find it yourself.

Illmatic, you whine that the Talmud calls non-jews evil people who go to hell? The Jews don't hold by that. Read more damnit. Read about the sections of heaven containing righteous gentiles described by real rabbinical authorities. Read about Jethro. Read about Enoch. Hell, be modern, read about Schindler. I suppose you think the Jews think the scum sucking gentile who saved their lives went to hell huh?

The bottom line is this, and if you can gain one iota of information from this post let it be this... I am likely the only person on this board fluently versed in the language the talmud was originally written in. You are all reading what you have decided to accept in translation form. Translated by who? Who cares! That doesn't matter to you. The fact that you read tiny excerpts of something bigger than the encyclopedia britannica? That doesn't bother you either.

I will not claim to have read this for seven years. Nor do I claim to have the mental capacity to properly understand everything in it. However, I have read many more Tractates of it in Aramaic than any one of you have. I am sick and tired of your bull#. You know nothing about this work. Not a damn thing. You take points that are proven wrong and not followed, and you only excerpt them.

Try taking all of the US Supreme Court decisions of the last 100 years. Quote for me only the dissenting opinions, and understand why your version of this country is different than reality. That is what you people and your worthless links have done here. It is a disgrace.

Djarums,

why are you so bitter man?

it doesn't matter anyways,

as long as jewish people have their money and power and achievement that is all they want.

most of this talk about morality is just BS!

it comes down to where you live and how you live.

everything else is smoke and mirrors.

To further display the stupidity of your rantings I invite all of you critics to learn about the Jewish Doctrine called Dinah D'Malchuta Dinah. This translates literally into The Law of the Kingdom is the Law.

This was a doctrine written by the religious leadership of the Jews at the time of the diaspora. Its meaning is that wherever a Jew lives, regardless of the location or time, the Jew must follow the laws of the local rulers. Dinah (the law) D'Malchutah (of the Kingdom) Dinah (is the law). For the Jew, the secular law of the nation he resides in become on the same level to him as his religious laws. Don't spout crap about Jews deciding they are better than everyone else and don't listen to anyone else because this doctrine, which is LAW to the jew forces them to do otherwise. Effectively, for a Jew in the United States to violate US law is not only violating the government law in the US but is also sinning against GOD who wants the Jewish people to follow the laws of where they live.

Once again through REAL research your arguments hold no water. There is no "jews feel that they are above everyone around them" In fact if you take the time to read, you find just the opposite.

Djarums,
Few of us made claim to be scholars of the Talmud. I never did. In fact I made the point that the Talmud consists of at least 72 volumes. I have always defended Israel and the Jewish people in whenever I could within my limitations of my knowledge of Judaism. However the blanket accusation in your post towards me has been taken as a personal insult. Henceforth I will NEVER DEFEND JUDAISM AGAIN. If an insult is made against the Jewish people, then they can refute it. I won't attempt to.

[Edited on 16-9-2003 by jagdflieger]

Originally posted by THENEO
Djarums,

why are you so bitter man?

it doesn't matter anyways,

as long as jewish people have their money and power and achievement that is all they want.

most of this talk about morality is just BS!

it comes down to where you live and how you live.

everything else is smoke and mirrors.

I am bitter for refuting arguments based on nothingness. Thanks for the update.

And yeah theneo... as long as jewish people have their money and power right? Good show man... Good show...

If you can't handle my arguing back against people's points, go to a different thread. This was directed at those whose stated points I disagreed with. I find nothing wrong with arguing back.

That's a fairly irrational way of seeing things jag. My post was clearly not directed at you if you were not someone saying that the Talmud called non jews animals. That was the topic of this thread. Those are the people I was using my knowledge to refute. I have no clue why you took personal offense to this being that you did not warp the talmud's content and make hideous statements about it. But hey, I'm not going to convince you to do anything. I didn't mention the names of the people I was arguing with because I don't like to drag things to a personal level. I guess you didn't understand that.

I will therefore clarify: My comments were directed at the authors of the links posted by the people who have decided that the Talmud is some form of jewish superiority book and the people who have decided that those links are the authority. Does that help?

I also don't understand your statement of "I will never defend judaism again". Jag, from your standpoint I am a text based entity on a message board. If you are willing to not speak what you believe in because of what I say then I have to question what kind of person you are.

[Edited on 9-16-2003 by Djarums]

Djarums, when I took my English courses, the pronoun "you" normally meant everyone in the context you were using it. Since you did not clarify to whom you were refering, then the term "you" would then refer to whomever had posted in this thread. Therefore that included me. Also you did make a direct reference to one specific person in your post. This also lead me to believe that you were refering to everyone who has posted here. Therefore I concluded that you were also refering to me and Valhall.