The Talmud

[RomanCrusader]

Now, we have all seen criticisms of the Koran. However what many do not seem to realize is that the Talmud is far more blasphemous and insulting to the Catholic faith than the Koran is. While we obviously disagree with the Koran, at least it venerates Jesus and Mary. The Talmud on the other hand insults the two in the worst terms possible.

The Medieval Catholic Church knew very well the evil in the Talmud, which is why it was banned and/or denounced by multiple Pontiffs. One is not a racist or nazi for denouncing the Talmud, despite what Talmundic apologists claim. Our Jewish friends deserve far better than the horrid Talmud.

Here is a good link where the Talmud is exposed. Racism against gentiles, insults towards Christ and Mary, etc. overflows from the pages. It should be mentioned the obviosuly most Jews do not agree with these insane parts of the Talmud, or even know of them. The link has a few stupid/extreme parts, but the Talmundic quotes are valid, which is what you should check out.

revisionisthistory.org/talmudtruth.html

Here are a few samples:

Kethuboth 11b. “When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing.”

Baba Mezia 59b. A rabbi debates God and defeats Him. God admits the rabbi won the debate.

Menahoth 43b-44a. A Jewish man is obligated to say the following prayer every day: Thank you God for not making me a gentile, a woman or a slave.

Soferim 15, Rule 10. This is the saying of Rabbi Simon ben Yohai: Tob shebe goyyim harog (“Even the best of the gentiles should all be killed”).

Yebamoth 98a. All gentile children are animals.

Gittin 57a. Says Jesus is in hell, being boiled in “hot excrement.”

 

[Valke2]

You are quite the scholar. DId you study this with David Duke?

 

[swariffin]

Dear RomanCrusader,

As far as I know, (I may be obsolete), the most glorious book/law for the Jews is the Thorah, not the Talmud. Thorah has been existed since Moses period until this present day I believe. Since the exile period of the Israelite, they feel the need to come back to God, by means of following God’s law. In the process, emerged a new group of knowledgeable of the Thorah, and find ways to interpret it for daily life of the Jews, whom were known as the Pharessee.

In the development, the Thorah as it was just a collection of written laws, were not suited for daily life of the Jews. Therefore, interpretations were made, and documented in the book called the Myzina. Further, the Myzina could no longer suitable to more and more complex daily life of the Jews, and more interpretations were made. Further derivation of the Myzina was called the Talmud.

Since it was obvious from the gospels that Jesus often critized the practices of the Pharessee, we can conclude that the Talmud, which was derived from the Myzina, derived from the Thorah, was beyond and was derailed from the original purpose of God when God gave the law to human. In the letter of the Romans, even St. Paul contradicted the laws in the Thorah against the law of Love and faith. Of course, both Jesus and Paul did not contradicted the Thorah, but rather the Talmud.

So, no wonder we see the Talmud, especially written post to Jesus’ life is very much condemn Him, Mary, and whoever associated with Jesus (including you and me, perhaps).

 

[Lev23]

One is not a racist or nazi for denouncing the Talmud, despite what Talmundic apologists claim. Our Jewish friends deserve far better than the horrid Talmud.

The Jews do have better–the Torah, the Psalms, and the Prophets. There are Jews who read the scriptures without rabbinical commentary, always have been.

Some of them are called karaites.

Some are called Christians.

None of them Roman Crusaders.

 

[KarenNC]

Here are a few samples:

Kethuboth 11b. “When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing.”

Much more interesting when you read it in context
come-and-hear.com/kethuboth/kethuboth_11.html

This passage is referring to whether a woman can be considered a virgin when she comes to be married, an important consideration in determining the amount of her ketubah settlement if the marriage should end with divorce or the death of the husband (essentially her dowry).
jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=187&letter=K

“The minimum amount payable under a ketubah was 200 zuz (a zuz = about 15 cents) for virgins, and 100 zuz for women who were not virgins at marriage…”

So, in context, it would seem that this is saying that even if a little girl were raped or sexually abused before a certain age, she could still be considered a virgin when it came time for her to marry and eligible for the higher bride price.

Baba Mezia 59b. A rabbi debates God and defeats Him. God admits the rabbi won the debate.[/qutoe]

web.ics.purdue.edu/~marinaj/babyloni.htm if one cares to actually read this and see what it says.

Rereading Genesis 18:23-32 (as well as a few other passages) might also be instructive.

Menahoth 43b-44a. A Jewish man is obligated to say the following prayer every day: Thank you God for not making me a gentile, a woman or a slave.

This and many others are discussed further on
groups.msn.com/Mishpocha/thetalmudpart4.msnw

etc

Overall, if you want to study Christian texts and their meaning and understanding within the Christian community both in modern and ancient contexts, it is more reasonable to do so from a Christian source than a Muslim one. Similarly, if one wants to study a Jewish text (particularly an ancient one) and understand what it means for Jews today it would be better to do so from a Jewish source than a Christian one (particularly a Christian one with an agenda).

 

[KarenNC]

I think the mission statement of Michael Hoffman and his Revisionist History site speaks for itself in terms of its agenda and potential for being considered an objective credible site

revisionisthistory.org/page1/page6/page6.html

We can also take a look at his track record on other issues:
the Holocaust for instance
ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p467_Hoffman.html
revisionistreview.blogspot.com/2006/02/holohoax-cartoon-satirizing.html

The Columbia shuttle disaster
splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=8
"Holocaust denier Michael Hoffman took the location of the destruction as a sign of good things to come. “The symbolism of the Israeli ‘combat air force’ pilot blowing up in the approximate vicinity of Palestine, Texas, requires no embellishment or explications,” Hoffman wrote. “Rarely does what we might call ‘the hand of God’ move so dramatically in world affairs.” "

 

[lukewarm]

Orthodox Jews still stand by those feelings, where I’m from Orthodox Jews would ignore you and not even acknowledge your existence. They would treat you like… well animals just like the Talmud says we are, I guess that’s why they’re “Orthodox Jews”, not reform, they actually believe what their book says.

 

[Marc1152]

Now, we have all seen criticisms of the Koran. However what many do not seem to realize is that the Talmud is far more blasphemous and insulting to the Catholic faith than the Koran is. While we obviously disagree with the Koran, at least it venerates Jesus and Mary. The Talmud on the other hand insults the two in the worst terms possible.

The Medieval Catholic Church knew very well the evil in the Talmud, which is why it was banned and/or denounced by multiple Pontiffs. One is not a racist or nazi for denouncing the Talmud, despite what Talmundic apologists claim. Our Jewish friends deserve far better than the horrid Talmud.

Here is a good link where the Talmud is exposed. Racism against gentiles, insults towards Christ and Mary, etc. overflows from the pages. It should be mentioned the obviosuly most Jews do not agree with these insane parts of the Talmud, or even know of them. The link has a few stupid/extreme parts, but the Talmundic quotes are valid, which is what you should check out.

revisionisthistory.org/talmudtruth.html

Here are a few samples:

Kethuboth 11b. “When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing.”

Baba Mezia 59b. A rabbi debates God and defeats Him. God admits the rabbi won the debate.

Menahoth 43b-44a. A Jewish man is obligated to say the following prayer every day: Thank you God for not making me a gentile, a woman or a slave.

Soferim 15, Rule 10. This is the saying of Rabbi Simon ben Yohai: Tob shebe goyyim harog (“Even the best of the gentiles should all be killed”).

Yebamoth 98a. All gentile children are animals.

Gittin 57a. Says Jesus is in hell, being boiled in “hot excrement.”

Have you ever read any of the older canons of both the Eastern and Western Church and what they say about avoiding Jews?

How many Jew’s have gone out to the local Christian communities and slaughterd the villigers?
Yet Jews knew at Easter Time that rabid anti-semites egged on by the Christian Seromons were coming for them and had to hide out or face being lynched…

Those in glass houses…etc.

 

[lukewarm]

Have you ever read any of the older canons of both the Eastern and Western Church and what they say about avoiding Jews?

How many Jew’s have gone out to the local Christian communities and slaughterd the villigers?
Yet Jews knew at Easter Time that rabid anti-semites egged on by the Christian Seromons were coming for them and had to hide out or face being lynched…

Those in glass houses…etc.

When Jews had power in Israel they slaughtered the neighboring inhabitants over and over again.

 

[Marc1152]

When Jews had power in Israel they slaughtered the neighboring inhabitants over and over again.

You mean a couple thousand years ago?

And how is this is different than the Greeks and Romans and Visagoths, and Huns and Celts?

Those in glass houses…

 

[lukewarm]

You mean a couple thousand years ago?

And how is this is different than the Greeks and Romans and Visagoths, and Huns and Celts?

Those in glass houses…

My point is those in power will typically abuse those with fewer numbers, since Jews were a very small minority of course they weren’t the ones attacking people. But when Jews had the numbers they were just as vicious. It’s a pointless debate to bring up especially thousands of years later. Not to mention it has nothing to do with the topic of the talmud or glass houses.

 

[Valke2]

I really can’t believe I have to post this rebuttal again. It seems every few months someone brings up this nonsense.

The first thing you should understand about Talmud, is that it is a discussion between rabbis/sages throughout centuries. As such, most, if not all, topics will contain a majority and a dissenting opinion. So, for example, you might find a rabbi in the Talmud saying gentiles are no better than animals (probably quoted from a rabbi who saw his village burned, women raped and murdered and children impaled) and then you will find the opinion that is followed, saying that gentiles are to be treated the same as Jews in all business dealings, etc.

I pulled the most egregious allegation from Cursader’s post, because Karen has already done a good job in addressing some of the others. I also want to emphasize that I did not have any idea before researching the answer below, whether Crusader’s quote was accurate, mistranslate, or a complete fabrication.

Soferim 15, Rule 10. This is the saying of Rabbi Simon ben Yohai: Tob shebe goyyim harog (“Even the best of the gentiles should all be killed”).

For starters, I have no idea what “Rule 10” means. This doesn’t have any meaning as far as I know in the Talmud. The Tractate Soferim deals mostly with the preparation of holy scrolls.

Normative Judaism has never disputed the simple fact that all men are brothers and that Jews and non-Jews alike are created in God’s image.

Rabbi Akiva said "Beloved is man, for he was created in God’s image; and the fact that God made it known that man was created in His image is indicative of an even greater love.

Soloveitchik, one of the greatest rabbis of the 20th century:
[a Jew]…is committed to the belief that all mankind, of whatever color or creed, is in “His image” and is possessed of an inherent human dignity and worthiness."

Anyway, the quote Crusader pasted seems to be from the Jerusalem Talmud, which is more diffuclt to read and generally not studied by the majority of Jews. The quote was in the context of when Jews were at war and is understood as saying that the status of a non-Jewish opponent cannot be taken into account at such times. In other words, if we are being attacked in war, we cannot say, “do not kill them, for they are created in God’s image.”

 

[lukewarm]

Valke, you seem like smart guy, you must see why these things would be offensive to non-Jews right? How would you feel if we had a Holy book that we used to teach calling all Jews animals, and kill all Jews even the righteous ones, or mocked your prophets and said they are boiling in pig semen, or call them whores. Don’t use a double standard you wouldn’t afford us the same privelige.

It’s amazing how just pointing out apparent verses of Jewish racism and supremicism can get one labeled “David Duke” or a racist. When the reality s they are denouncing racist statements. The worlds gone crazy, call a spade a spade the writings are offensive and very racist towards non-Jews. Stating the obvious doesn’t make one a racist.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

come-and-hear.com/talmud/

reading the talmud in context is a good idea.

R. Joseph said: Come and hear! A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabits with her, she becomes his. The penalty of adultery may be incurred through her; [if a niddah] she defiles him who has connection with her, so that he in turn defiles that upon which he lies, as a garment which has lain upon [a person afflicted with gonorrhoea].5 If she married a priest, she may eat of terumah;6 If any unfit person7 has a connection with her, he disqualifies her from the priesthood8 — If any of the forbidden degrees had intercourse with her, they are executed on her account,9 but she is exempt.10 Now, ‘any of the forbidden degrees’ implies even a beast: in this case, there is degradation but no stumbling-block, yet it is taught that they [including a beast] are slain on her account.11 [No, this is not conclusive, as it can be argued that] since she deliberately offended there is a stumbling-block] [though she is a minor] but the All-Merciful One had mercy upon her; now, He shewed mercy to her, but not to the animal.

come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_55.html

R. Jeremiah of Difti said: We also learnt the following: A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabited with her, she becomes his. The penalty of adultery may be incurred through her; [if a niddah,] she defiles him who has connection with her, so that he in turn defiles that upon which he lies, as a garment which has lain upon [a person afflicted with gonorrhoea]. If she married a priest, she may eat of terumah; if any unfit person cohabits with her, he disqualifies her from the priesthood. If any of the forbidden degrees had intercourse with her, they are executed on her account, but she is exempt.22

come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_69.html

come-and-hear.com/navigate.html

check the links for these two quotes and tell me what you think.

 

[Valke2]

Valke, you seem like smart guy, you must see why these things would be offensive to non-Jews right? How would you feel if we had a Holy book that we used to teach calling all Jews animals, and kill all Jews even the righteous ones, or mocked your prophets and said they are boiling in pig semen, or call them whores. Don’t use a double standard you wouldn’t afford us the same privelige.

It’s amazing how just pointing out apparent verses of Jewish racism and supremicism can get one labeled “David Duke” or a racist. When the reality s they are denouncing racist statements. The worlds gone crazy, call a spade a spade the writings are offensive and very racist towards non-Jews. Stating the obvious doesn’t make one a racist.

Of course I can see how it would be offensive. But I also know that these arguments have traditionally been made, for the last 800 years, as a way of wiping up hatred against the Jewish community. To take a post from a rabbi who was discussing behavior in war and to conclude that Judaism teaches that non jews are animals or that we are to kill non-jews, is ignorance at best.

 

[lukewarm]

Of course I can see how it would be offensive. But I also know that these arguments have traditionally been made, for the last 800 years, as a way of wiping up hatred against the Jewish community. To take a post from a rabbi who was discussing behavior in war and to conclude that Judaism teaches that non jews are animals or that we are to kill non-jews, is ignorance at best.

I don’t think it’s ignorance as much as it is just reading the words and taking the literal meaning.

What happened to Jewish people was terrible, what happened to teh Armenians and Irish under the British was terrible. if you can show me anything that the Catholic Church teaches in the Bible or Catechism that is equally offensive to Jews I would denounce it outright. I don’t understand why your insistence in defending things that are obviously bigoted and offensive, and are seriously racist statements against non-Jews. Especially to call someone “David Duke” which is a pretty loaded charge for just puting them out there.

 

[Valke2]

I don’t think it’s ignorance as much as it is just reading the words and taking the literal meaning.

What happened to Jewish people was terrible, what happened to teh Armenians and Irish under the British was terrible. if you can show me anything that the Catholic Church teaches in the Bible or Catechism that is equally offensive to Jews I would denounce it outright. I don’t understand why your insistence in defending things that are obviously bigoted and offensive, and are seriously racist statements against non-Jews. Especially to call someone “David Duke” which is a pretty loaded charge for just puting them out there.

Because it isn’t bigoted and it doesn’t teach that Gentiles are animals or that we are to kill them. It teaches that when at war, it is permissible to kill, even though Gentiles are created in God’s image.

As for the David Duke charge, I stated that because he often makes these assertions on his website and in other places. Crusader’s post was much like what is found on Duke’s site.

 

[lukewarm]

Because it isn’t bigoted and it doesn’t teach that Gentiles are animals or that we are to kill them. It teaches that when at war, it is permissible to kill, even though Gentiles are created in God’s image.

Not for nothing but that appears to be your “interpretation” of the verses or at least the one you like, when you just read them as they appear they seem pretty straightforward and offensive.

And it does explain why orthodox Jews who live in communities do not acknowledge the “gentiles” existence. Is it possible they take a more literal rendering of these verses?

 

[Kaninchen]

I doubt that it would be exactly difficult to take odd passages, even sentences, from any lengthy piece of text and ‘prove’ all sorts of things about it.

Those on both sides who have grave suspicions that "whatever any of them say, deep down . . . . " probably get quite a bit of enjoyment from the whole business.

 

[lukewarm]

It just seems to me that religion can cloud people from seeing something clearly before them. It’s like the Koran that says to find the Jew hiding behind the rock and slay him (paraphrasing) or these verses in the talmud, or Catholics who defend the inquisition and Crusades. It’s like people are too proud to say “you know what, yeah that was wrong and offensive I don’t even know why we still follow that, or it’s even taught”… It’s like this crazy black or whiteness in religion that admitting the tiniest error somehow dismantles your entire faith. So you use dissonance and self-justification to justify the most slanderous things and insane behavior. It’s crazy to me is all.

If you read these verses in the New York Times tomorrow you would be aghast at them.