posted on Nov, 2 2005 @ 03:56 PM
If you REALLY want a list (as if you didn't know this heinous vomit exists in the writings of the Jews) here are some tasty morsels for you to chew
on tonight: it is clear from the context that the neutral term (goy) became far more pejorative during the Tannaitic and Talmudic period in the
Rabinnic writings (possibly "sour grapes" since Jerusalem was ground to poweder by the Kittim (i.e. Romans) in AD 70 and again in AD 138 during the
2nd failed Jewish revolt under Bar Kokhba...
But just for kicks and giggles, try reading some passages from the Choshen Hammishphat 34, 22 "an apostate from the faith or a Traitor to the Jews
and Epicureans are all worse than THE GOYIM..."
or check out Abhodah Zarah 15b: "male animals must never be left alone in the barns with the goyim" or Abhodah Zarah 33b "never leave an animal
with a female goy because they tend to have sex with animals when their husbands are out fornicating..."
or read the Biur Hetiv (pesher on Schulchan Arukh): "a Jewess must always wash herself again if she should come across a dog or a donkey or an
Akum-goy, or a camel or a pig or a leper or a horse."
Or have a quick dekko (if you have time) at: Sanhedrin 74b: Tosephoth:
"for behold, the sexual act of THE GOYIM are like the sex acts of Beasts of Prey..." or Kethuboth 3b: "for the Semen of a Goy is worth the same as
that of a stupid beast..."
Or even Rabbi Schlomo Iarchi (Rashi) in his lame Pesher Deut 14:21 "do not eat the flesh of wounded animals, but throw them to the gentile at the
Gate: which even as it is written in Ex. 23:30, this must be thrown to the DOGS...for the Goy is Like unto a Dog: But are we to refer to a dog
literally here? Not at all, for the text reads: Or you may sell it to a Stranger, applying the rule to wounded animals: Why does Scripture then say it
must be thrown to the dogs, then? In order to teach you that a DOG is more respected than a Gentile Nokheri."
Or look at: Kerithuth 6b " the teachings of the Rebbes is: he who annoints a GOY with oil or a dead animal is free from sin: this is true for an
animal because it is not human: but aren't the Goyim also human? By no means, for it is written: Hezekiel 34: "Ye are my flock, and the flock of my
pasture are all men."
Or if you get really bored today, have a look at: the Zohar II (64b):" People who worship idols are called Cows and Donkeys, even as it is written:
Behold I have a Cow and a Donkey. "
Or, Rebbe Bechai's inane comments in Kad haKkemach: "by the term Wild Piglet here the author means the Gentiles who all eat unclean Pork flesh, and
like Pigs, have destroyed the Vineyard of Yisroel, the city of Jerusalem, and who worship the Messiah who was suspended."
There are several dozen more of these heinous passages, which no matter how you try to gloss over and water down for the masses on these threads, you
cannot completely escape the racism inherent in them...
Of course my personal favourite comes from R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean ("Jeeezuzzz") and his encounter with the filfthy gentile "dog" Syro
Phonecian lady who came to him for help with her daughter in the story as related in Matt chapter 15: (read it in Koine Greek if you can, it's
juicier than the watered down versions meant for Christian congregations in the KJV..)
Her plea for help was met with a sneer:
QUOTE "The Son of Man ws sent only to the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel...and anyway, since when it is right to take the Bread of the Children
(i.e. of the Kingdom) and throw it away on THE DOGS under the table?"
The idea of exterminating and genociding non-Jews (the Kittim) is found in the War Scroll from the Dead Sea Corpus from around BC 20 see: 1QM Column
"And the Sons of Light shall write on their Standards as they march out to the War: The Reward of EL, the Power of EL, the Extermination of all the
GOYIM of Vanity by the Followers of EL..."
There are several dozen of such statements in the Dead Sea Scroll Corpus: Do you REALLY want me to list them all for you?
Also, you have not answered MY question:
Why did you choose the Massoretic pointing of Exodus 19:6 in your quite pointless quote above?
Why do you assume that the VAV ("and") was NOT an original part of the Hebrew text when the Hebrew Underlay (VORLAGE) to the Greek Old Testament,
written 1000 years earlier than the Massoretic Text, clearly places the VAV in between KINGDOM and PRIESTS ("thou shalt be unto me a KINGDOM AND
PRIESTS") as does the earlier Sammaritan Pentateuch--with the two families (Judah and Levi) regarded in earlier times as quite separate entities:
This deliberate tampering with the text was accomplished by the manipulaion of hand copied texts (no photocopies back then!!) by crooked scribal
copyists who were very well aware of what they were doing by favouring one text over another (which echoes Jeremiah’s lament about this class of
people: behold, alas, the LYING PEN of the SCRIBES !!)
Their scribal dirty handiwork was in full conscious league with the ruling Zadokite priests who naturally benefited from such a mis-representation of
these words (the so-called Saddukkim or Sadducees) who ran the Temple of YHWH and their central bank in Jerusalem on Mt Moriah and after 104 BC began
calling themselves “Kings” (based on THEIR warped version this very verse) to distance themselves from the Kingdom of David which was then in
The very anti-Saduccean (and very Daviddic) R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean (“Jeezuzz”) began his sword wielding armed revolt in AD 36 (for
which he paid the ultimate penalty during the reign of the Divine Tiberius) on the 100th anniversary of the Invasion of the Roman General Pompey (BC
63) which was 100 years after the Macabbees took control of the Temple Cult in BC 163---in a vain attempt to Restore the Kingdom of David on earth
“during the Last Days” (and kick out the Saduccean “priest-kings” and relegate the High Priest to being only, well…a High Priest) (e.g. Amos
chapter 9 :
”In that Day, I shall raise again the tabernacle of David which is fallen” a phrase which was interpreted Messianically by the Dead Sea Scroll
And yet you mindlessly quote this verse as if it came down from the sky on a platter fully pointed (i.e. with vowels) and as if there were only one
version of this disputed text in antiquity.
I would caution you to do a little research on the texts you blindly quote in order to make your points, which are neither here nor there when you
look at them closely.