Originally posted by Rambam42I don't get the feeling that Diogenes (the most convenient example) is unintelligent. The kind of rhetoric people like Hoffman sling around (and I have read excerpts of some of his works) is byzantine in its complexity, seeking plots and malfeasance by hook or by crook. It takes a great deal of intellect to handle all of that information. The problem appears to be that anti-Jewish statements and arguments are accepted with significantly less discernment than contrary arguments, no matter how complete or well-reasoned.
you have the temerity to talk about Hoffman being "byzantine" in his complexity, while completely covering up the labrynthine nature of the Talmud and Judaism and its satanic works. Hoffman's work is "byzantine" because he's uncovering the "byzantine" nature of the Talmud and Judaism, with all its subterfuge and witch craft to hide the meaning from prying eyes
there are no "contrary arguments, no matter how complete or well-reasoned." They are especially not "complete or well-reasoned." Hoffman goes through these ridiculous attempts quite well
In sum, stuff like Hoffman is peddling is an unfortunate fact of life and we deal with it the best we can. Make no mistake though, we do work to address it. It's just tough to argue logically with someone who uses two different yardsticks to judge proof, and and who won't believe you unless you validate his already-held beliefs. When confronted with proof, they usually retreat into name-calling or casting aspersions.
WHERE is the proof?
Torah teaches love for humanity, once you get through the rather barbarous accretions of the centuries.
now here, is a fine example of Talmudic black magic. Notice he uses "Torah," while being deliberately ambiguous about what he's actually referring to
Hoffman has shown that Rabbis actually mean the "Talmud" when they refer to the Torah. The Talmud itself also says that it should be trust more than the Old Testament. Being that Judaism is not at all derived from the Old Testament, by making the ludicrous claim that the Talmud was derived from an "Oral law" handed down by Moses to the pharisees, when no such thing is mentioned in the Old or New Testaments.
G-d commands us, Jews and Gentiles, care for one another.
see what I mean by their self-worshiping, self-righteous attitude? We're supposed to only know what the Talmud says by what THEY SAY it says, that's all. Their word is enough, no scholarly investigation is needed, just because they say it is it's true, that's all. The Rabbis are not to be questioned, only they can interpret and study the Talmud
remember that Maimonides refused to provide medical treatment to gentiles and affirmed that this was from the Talmud, that gentiles are not to be treated, and that they were ONLY to be treated, if gentile HOSTILITY was dangerous to Jews, so that Jews would protect themselves. But if Jewish supremacy is prevalent, and there's no danger, they cannot provide treatment to gentiles. This "clause" is what Rabbis use to actually lie about how gentiles are refused medical treatment
So, Diogenes, I believe you to be a good person, who wishes only justice and peace for all people.
if Talmudism and Jews actually believed in justice and peace for all people, they would have accepted Jesus Christ. This is what makes no sense, they claim to be standing for everything that Jesus stands for, and yet they hate him with a passion
