Are These Accusations Against the Talmud True?

[Radrook]

Are the following accusations against the Talmud true? Or are they twistings of scripture?

Excerpt


Quote:
Moed Kattan 17a: If a Jew is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there.

Erubin 21b. Whosoever disobeys the rabbis deserves death and will be punished by being boiled in hot excrement in hell.

Sanhedrin 58b. If a heathen (gentile) hits a Jew, the gentile must be killed.

Sanhedrin 57a . A Jew need not pay a gentile ("Cuthean") the wages owed him for work.

Baba Kamma 37b. "If an ox of an Israelite gores an ox of a Canaanite there is no liability; but if an ox of a Canaanite gores an ox of an Israelite...the payment is to be in full."


Baba Mezia 24a . If a Jew finds an object lost by a gentile ("heathen") it does not have to be returned. (Affirmed also in Baba Kamma 113b). Sanhedrin 76a. God will not spare a Jew who "marries his daughter to an old man or takes a wife for his infant son or returns a lost article to a Cuthean..."

Sanhedrin 57a . When a Jew murders a gentile ("Cuthean"), there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a gentile he may keep.

Baba Kamma 37b. The gentiles are outside the protection of the law and God has "exposed their money to Israel."

Baba Kamma 113a. Jews may use lies ("subterfuges") to circumvent a Gentile.

Yebamoth 98a. All gentile children are animals.

Abodah Zarah 36b. Gentile girls are in a state of niddah (filth) from birth.

Abodah Zarah 22a-22b . Gentiles prefer sex with cows.

http://www.revisionisthistory.org/talmudtruth.html

[KingMerv00]

Couldn't be true. Holy books never advocate violence or racism.

[Cavemonster]

Here's a stab at some of it.
http://talmud.faithweb.com/articles/short.html

Presenting these as translated excepts is at least intellectually dishonest (on the part of whoever assembled this list). The lines you quoted are paraphrasings of some very weird language that doesn't paint so clear a picture.

As for the Talmud in general, reading it as a list of prescriptions ignores the way the Talmud actually works in the culture.
The actual role of Talmud is a little closer to Koans in many ways. The ultimate goal of many Jews in eastern European Shtetls a few hundred years ago was to become financially independent enough to spend every day in the house of learning, trying to figure out what the hell the Talmud actually means.

[Ausmerican]

No none of that is true. You just lack Talmudic literacy.

[a_unique_person]

I think we've been over this several times before.

Don't believe anything you read at http://www.revisionisthistory.org/talmudtruth.html for a start. What you would read there would be worse than anything the Talmud contains.

However, as someone has already said, if the Talmud was the only religious book in history that didn't contain something you found you didn't agree with, it would be quite an achievement. I have read some of the 'apologies', (in the religious sense) on a few of the Talmuds controversial passages, and they are as wafflous as any other religous person defending their own doctrine.

It is interesting the author only attacks the Talmud, and not the Pentatuch. Now theres some real meat on the bones in that little pot boiler, but it's also a xian holy book, so you can't criticise that.

In short, just be an atheist and don't worry about it any more than you would worry about any other religion.

[Cavemonster]

So enlighten me then. Tell me about your literacy.

The Talmud is said to have been completed by the 6th century, but in reality it is never complete. That is because the Talmud is meant to be studied and debated in a communal setting, thus leaving it open to continuous development. As a matter of fact, it isn't even the point when studying the Talmud to reach a conclusion. Rather, Talmudic debate is a form of religious ritual that can bring the student of Torah to experience God's word directly
from the Oxford University Press

[stilicho]

An Idaho-based nutbar is suing Stormfront for stealing their idiotic ideas? I think that's the real story here.

[FireGarden]

Are the following accusations against the Talmud true? Or are they twistings of scripture?

Excerpt


Quote:
Moed Kattan 17a: If a Jew is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there.

http://www.revisionisthistory.org/talmudtruth.html

I put the first into google and got this:
http://talmud.faithweb.com/articles/short.html

which claims to refute the claim.

That said, I can't find the quote on http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/index.htm

a google search (http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&as_q=&as_epq=Moed+Kattan&as_oq=&as_eq=&num=10&lr=&as_filetype=&ft=i&as_sitesearch=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sacred-texts.com&as_qdr=all&as_rights=&as_occt=any&cr=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&safe=images) of "Moed Kattan" site:http://www.sacred-texts.com turns up nothing.

[Bikewer]

The first one sounds like "What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas".

[Ausmerican]

So enlighten me then. Tell me about your literacy.

from the Oxford University Press

Cavemonster, it's a bit of a joke. Every time someone points out any of the many horrible things in the bible, radrook tells them they lack scriptural literacy and are therefore in no position to judge. So in this case the goose was getting what was good for the gander.

[Beerina]

Couldn't be true. Holy books never advocate violence or racism.

I thought they couldn't be true, except coincidentally, because they were all fraudulent memes living as a parasite that evolved to control the masses without causing too much damage.

[Loss Leader]

Yebamoth 98a. All gentile children are animals.


Everything you've posted is antisemitic propaganda.

I picked the above "quote" at random. Thirty seconds on Google showed that it has been thoroughly debunked. Here's a great page (http://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/man2.html) explaining how the "quote" misstates the Talmud.

As it says:

Gentiles are people and not merely animals and the verse in Ezekiel does not mean that gentiles are animals. To understand the verse literally, the Talmud says, is to misunderstand the verse. Gentiles are unquestionably human, created in G-d's image, and Jewish law recognizes this as do the rabbis of the Talmud.

But there is something deeper. Your question implies that, since the Talmud says something, that it is part of the Jewish religion. And if the Jewish religion thinks so little of non-Jews (allowing Jews to steal from them, etc.), then conspiracy theories claiming that Jews take advantage of non-Jews are more likely to be true. And your "quotes" ask us to infer that if the conspiracy theories are more likely to be true, then they are true.

So let me put your mind entirely at ease. As a Jew who lives immersed in a deep Jewish culture in one of the most Jewish areas on the planet (being just outside of New York City), I can tell you with absolute confidence: The thoughts and beliefs stated in these Talmud "quotes" form no part of the Jewish religion. They are in absolute opposition to the morals and values that Jews are taught. They are never considered or discussed. Statements such as these "quotes" are believed to be morally wrong and would be intollerable to the vast bulk of modern Jewish believers.

Even if the Talmud says these things, which it does not, they are not a part of what it means to be Jewish.

[Cavemonster]

Cavemonster, it's a bit of a joke. Every time someone points out any of the many horrible things in the bible, radrook tells them they lack scriptural literacy and are therefore in no position to judge. So in this case the goose was getting what was good for the gander.

Ah sorry, I thought you were addressing my post.

[Cainkane1]

Are the following accusations against the Talmud true? Or are they twistings of scripture?

Excerpt


Quote:
Moed Kattan 17a: If a Jew is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there.

Erubin 21b. Whosoever disobeys the rabbis deserves death and will be punished by being boiled in hot excrement in hell.

Sanhedrin 58b. If a heathen (gentile) hits a Jew, the gentile must be killed.

Sanhedrin 57a . A Jew need not pay a gentile ("Cuthean") the wages owed him for work.

Baba Kamma 37b. "If an ox of an Israelite gores an ox of a Canaanite there is no liability; but if an ox of a Canaanite gores an ox of an Israelite...the payment is to be in full."


Baba Mezia 24a . If a Jew finds an object lost by a gentile ("heathen") it does not have to be returned. (Affirmed also in Baba Kamma 113b). Sanhedrin 76a. God will not spare a Jew who "marries his daughter to an old man or takes a wife for his infant son or returns a lost article to a Cuthean..."

Sanhedrin 57a . When a Jew murders a gentile ("Cuthean"), there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a gentile he may keep.

Baba Kamma 37b. The gentiles are outside the protection of the law and God has "exposed their money to Israel."

Baba Kamma 113a. Jews may use lies ("subterfuges") to circumvent a Gentile.

Yebamoth 98a. All gentile children are animals.

Abodah Zarah 36b. Gentile girls are in a state of niddah (filth) from birth.

Abodah Zarah 22a-22b . Gentiles prefer sex with cows.

http://www.revisionisthistory.org/talmudtruth.html
Look at the history of any religion. Buddists always seemed mellow to me but they did do some pretty horrendous tortures which included live skinning.

[Cavemonster]

I'm going to make the suggestion that people refrain from quoting the whole original post. This is phrased as an honest question, but the real goal is to have these (mistranslated and out of context) statements repeated in as many places on the net as possible. Many people will start the thread, or see the title without having the energy or time to read the discussion and just internalize the smear. If one person is convinced, it has done it's job.

Again, no religion is one of pure peace and I'll be the first to admit that there are some disturbing aspects of Orthodox judaism as there are disturbing facets of every Orthodoxy.

The Talmud, unlike the pentateuch is regarded as HEAVY in metaphor and in every variation of jewish culture the meaning of every passage is hotly debated.

For instance, the "quote" above about disobeying the rabbi resulting in hot poo for eternity is taken from a dialogue that goes more or less like this.

Rabbi 1: So it is said that it is hard work to arrive at these teachings.
Rabbi 2: Ah! So that means that those who go against them should burn in excrement!
Rabbi 1: Not so fast! The word there used for "hard" could also mean "delectable meats" so the true meaining is that those who study are rewarded.

If Radrook actually wanted to discuss this he would be here discussing it. If he actually misunderstood the quotes above a very quick google search could have clarified things.

The level of context and meaningful interpretation used in these "quotes" is the equivalent of saying that the new testament orders Christians to drink blood and eat human flesh based on the communion.

[Radrook]

No none of that is true. You just lack Talmudic literacy.

I do lack Talmudic literacy. That's why I ask those who are Talmudically literate for help in understanding it instead of making up my own interpretations based on my Talmudic illiteracy.

[Radrook]

I'm going to make the suggestion that people refrain from quoting the whole original post. This is phrased as an honest question, but the real goal is to have these (mistranslated and out of context) statements repeated in as many places on the net as possible.


Why would I want to have that kind of trash done?



Many people will start the thread, or see the title without having the energy or time to read the discussion and just internalize the smear. If one person is convinced, it has done it's job.

If someone clarrifies these and identifies them as false-then the threead has done its's job.


Again, no religion is one of pure peace and I'll be the first to admit that there are some disturbing aspects of Orthodox judaism as there are disturbing facets of every Orthodoxy.
The Talmud, unlike the pentateuch is regarded as HEAVY in metaphor and in every variation of jewish culture the meaning of every passage is hotly debated.

Didn't know that.

For instance, the "quote" above about disobeying the rabbi resulting in hot poo for eternity is taken from a dialogue that goes more or less like this.

Rabbi 1: So it is said that it is hard work to arrive at these teachings.
Rabbi 2: Ah! So that means that those who go against them should burn in excrement!
Rabbi 1: Not so fast! The word there used for "hard" could also mean "delectable meats" so the true meaining is that those who study are rewarded.

Thanx for the clarification.

If Radrook actually wanted to discuss this he would be here discussing it.

I don't live on this thread or forum.


If he actually misunderstood the quotes above a very quick google search could have clarified things.

That;'s a matter of choice. This forum is to discuss religion. Isn't the Talmud discussion about religion? But if you indeed feel so strongly about it I suggest that you tell the administrator to grant me temporary permission to modify the post and I'll delete to your specifications. If indeed I offended, then I apologize.



I The level of context and meaningful interpretation used in these "quotes" is the equivalent of saying that the new testament orders Christians to drink blood and eat human flesh based on the communion.

Both illiteracies lead to ridiculous conclusions.

[Cavemonster]

I apologize, if I jumped to conclusions.
I still don't understand why you didn't begin with a simple web search.

[Radrook]

Here's a stab at some of it.
http://talmud.faithweb.com/articles/short.html

Presenting these as translated excepts is at least intellectually dishonest (on the part of whoever assembled this list). The lines you quoted are paraphrasings of some very weird language that doesn't paint so clear a picture.

I didn't think they would actually paraphrase since their manner of presentation indicates direct quotations. Thanks for the excellent link.

As for the Talmud in general, reading it as a list of prescriptions ignores the way the Talmud actually works in the culture. The actual role of Talmud is a little closer to Koans in many ways. The ultimate goal of many Jews in eastern European Shtetls a few hundred years ago was to become financially independent enough to spend every day in the house of learning, trying to figure out what the hell the Talmud actually means.

Didn't know that the Talmud was intended to be that cryptic. I assumed it would be strait-forward.

Below is one of the clarifications to the misleading paraphrasings:



Excerpt
The Text
Talmud Moed Kattan 17a
Rabbi Ila'i said: If a person is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known, dress in black clothes, cover his head in black, and do what his heart desires so that G-d's name will not be desecrated.

explanation



Note the part of the passage that is not quoted in the accusation. The accusers do not mention that this person (not necessarily a Jew) must dress in black and cover his head. Why should this be if the Talmud is offering advice on how to commit a crime? Quite the opposite, this person should try to blend in with everyone else. Rather the Talmud is offering very sound psychological advice. This person is not directly told "You can't do it." That advice to a person steeped in desire is meaningless because the person has lost control of his actions. Rather, the person is bidden to first delay his intended actions by going to a city where he is not known. This lengthy trip will serve as a cooling off period. He is then told to dress humbly which should further serve as a reminder of what he should be doing compared to what he plans on doing. Rather than offering carte blanche permission to sin, the Talmud is suggesting a form of indirect rebuke to prevent the person from sinning [see Rashi in the name of Rav Hai Gaon and Chiddushei HaRan; Tosafot, Kiddushin 40a]. The desecration of G-d's name is a subterfuge to convince this sick individual to follow the path to health.

[Radrook]

I apologize, if I jumped to conclusions.
I still don't understand why you didn't begin with a simple web search.

After a bit of deliberation I think that would have been the better of the two choices.
As you said, some people might just skim and walk away with the wrong impression.
My mistake.

[Cavemonster]

Sorry if I jumped on you there, I tend to assume that people are acting deliberately and this isn't the first time I've inferred incorrectly from an honest mistake. It's something I'm working on.

[Gagglegnash]

Hi

I did start with a web search, and got several Talmud links (I now have what looks like a reasonable translation of the Babylonian Talmud on my hard drive), but I'm having trouble navigating!

For instance: What does, "Moed Kattan 17a," mean?

All I can find in tract Moed Kattan with anything like a 17 on it is a mess of stuff about building railings on roofs and fixing rents in roofs on minor festivals....

....

This is SO cool. The day before yesterday, I thought, "Gemara," meant, "large, fire-breathing Japanese Turtle." D'oh!! (_8(|)

Talmud Online (http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/t04/kat03.htm)
Talmud Downloadable (http://www.winsite.com/bin/Info?21000000038217)

AHA! I found the one about sex with a three year old.

It doesn't say it's legal or allowed: It's an example of the ramifications of loss of the maidenhead vs. the loss of virginity.

It talks about a boy having sex with a woman, and how that's like being, "injured," with a stick, and if a man has sex with a 3 year old girl, how it's like her having a finger stuck in her eye.

In the first case, the woman can still be be considered a virgin, even though the maidenhead is taken, probably because the kid's shooting blanks. It's like loosing her maidenhead by falling on a stick.

The three year-old girl isn't guilty of anything because something was done to her, not by her, and, while the damage is like being blinded, it was an assault against her, so it wasn't her fault, so she's still a virgin.

Well - that's how I read it, anyhow.

[moon1969]

Erubin 21b - Whosoever disobeys the rabbis deserves death and will be punished by being boiled in hot excrement in hell.

Moed Kattan 17a - If a Jew is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there.

Insults Against Mary the Jew, Sanhedrin 106a . Says Jesus' mother was a whore: "She who was the descendant of princes and governors played the harlot with carpenters." Also in footnote #2 to Shabbath 104b it is stated that in the "uncensored" text of the Talmud it is written that Jesus mother, "Mary the hairdresser," had sex with many men.

Gittin 69a - To heal his flesh a Jew should take dust that lies within the shadow of an outdoor toilet, mix it with honey and eat it.

Gittin 70a - The Rabbis taught: "On coming from a privy (outdoor toilet) a man should not have sexual intercourse till he has waited long enough to walk half a mile, because the demon of the privy is with him for that time; if he does, his children will be epileptic."

To heal the disease of pleurisy ("catarrh") a Jew should take the excrement of a white dog and knead it with balsam, but if he can possibly avoid it he should not eat the dog's excrement as it loosens the limbs. Pesahim 111a.

It is forbidden for dogs, women or palm trees to pass between two men, nor may others walk between dogs, women or palm trees. Special dangers are involved if the women are menstruating or sitting at a crossroads. 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. Shabbath 86a-86b.

[linusrichard]

Oo! I love these! Here's a few more:


California:
It is a misdemeanor to shoot any kind of game from a moving vehicle, unless the target is a whale.

Florida:
Unmarried women who parachute on Sundays will be jailed.

Georgia:
1. In Quitman, it is illegal for a chicken to cross the road.
2. In Columbus, it is illegal to sit on one's porch in an indecent position.

Indiana:
Monkeys are forbidden to smoke cigarettes in South Bend.

Illinois:
1. In Chicago, it is illegal to take a french poodle to the Opera.
2. According to state law, it is illegal to speak English. The officially recognized language is "American."
3. In Joliet, it is illegal to mispronounce the name Joliet HeyWoodey.

Massachusetts:
1. It is illegal to wear a goatee without a license.
2. North Andover prohibits its citizens from carrying "space guns."
3. In 1659, the state outlawed Christmas.

Minnesota:
1. It is illegal to tease skunks.
2. Every man in Brainerd is required by law to grow a beard.

Michigan:
1. A State law stipulates that a woman's hair legally belongs to her husband.
2. Under State law, dentists are officially classified as "mechanics."

Montana:
1. In Whitehall, it is illegal to operate a vehicle with ice picks attached to the wheels.
2. It is a felony for a wife to open her husband's mail.

Nebraska:
1. If a child burps during a church service in Omaha, his or her parents may be arrested.
2. It is illegal for a mother to give her daughter a perm without a state license

New York:
1. On Staten Island, it is illegal for a father to call his son a faggot or queer in an effort to curb girlie behavior.
2. In NYC, "it is disorderly conduct for one man to greet another on the street by placing the end of his thumb against the tip of his nose and wiggling the extended fingers of that hand."

North Carolina:
1. It is illegal to make love on the floor of a hotel room between two double beds.

Oklahoma:
1. Whale hunting is strictly forbidden.
2. People who make "ugly faces" at dogs may be fined and/or jailed.

Ohio:
1. In Columbus, it is illegal for stores to sell corn flakes on Sunday.
2. In Oxford, it is illegal for a woman to disrobe in front of a man's picture.
3. In Youngstown, it is illegal to run out of gas.

Oregon:
1. The town of Hood River prohibits the act of juggling without a license.

Pennsylvania:
1. "Any motorist who sights a team of horses coming toward him must pull well off the road, cover his car with a blanket or canvas that blends with the countryside, and let the horses pass. If the horses appear skittish, the motorist must take his car apart piece by piece, and hide it under the nearest bushes."

Rhode Island:
It is illegal to throw pickle juice on a trolley.

Tennessee:
1. It is illegal to use a lasso to catch a fish.
2. In Dyersburg, it is illegal for a woman to call a man for a date.
3. In Memphis, it is illegal for a woman to drive by herself; "a man must walk or run in front of the vehicle, waving a red flag in order to warn approaching pedestrians and motorists."

Texas:
1. The entire Encyclopedia Britannica is banned because it contains a formula for making beer at home.
2. It is illegal to milk another person's cow.

Utah:
A husband is responsible for every criminal act committed by his wife in his presence.

Virginia:
1. In Richmond, it is illegal to flip a coin in any eating establishment to determine who buys a cup of coffee.
2. In Lebanon, it is illegal to kick your wife out of bed.

Vermont:
1. It is illegal to deny the existence of God.
2. It is illegal to whistle underwater.
3. Women must obtain written permission from their husbands to wear false teeth.

What fun!

[stilicho]

Erubin 21b - Whosoever disobeys.....

Can you locate any of those quotes in an on-line translation of the Talmud? It might help with the context.

[Safe-Keeper]

The Old Testament contains so many revolting examples of injustice, murder and plain ********, both inside and outside of context, that it wouldn't be a surprise if the Talmod did too. These people lived many, many years ago, and their morals were a tad bit different from ours.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Oo! I love these! Here's a few more:


California:
It is a misdemeanor to shoot any kind of game from a moving vehicle, unless the target is a whale.

Florida:
Unmarried women who parachute on Sundays will be jailed.

Georgia:
1. In Quitman, it is illegal for a chicken to cross the road.
2. In Columbus, it is illegal to sit on one's porch in an indecent position.

Indiana:
Monkeys are forbidden to smoke cigarettes in South Bend.

Illinois:
1. In Chicago, it is illegal to take a french poodle to the Opera.
2. According to state law, it is illegal to speak English. The officially recognized language is "American."
3. In Joliet, it is illegal to mispronounce the name Joliet HeyWoodey.

Massachusetts:
1. It is illegal to wear a goatee without a license.
2. North Andover prohibits its citizens from carrying "space guns."
3. In 1659, the state outlawed Christmas.

Minnesota:
1. It is illegal to tease skunks.
2. Every man in Brainerd is required by law to grow a beard.

Michigan:
1. A State law stipulates that a woman's hair legally belongs to her husband.
2. Under State law, dentists are officially classified as "mechanics."

Montana:
1. In Whitehall, it is illegal to operate a vehicle with ice picks attached to the wheels.
2. It is a felony for a wife to open her husband's mail.

Nebraska:
1. If a child burps during a church service in Omaha, his or her parents may be arrested.
2. It is illegal for a mother to give her daughter a perm without a state license

New York:
1. On Staten Island, it is illegal for a father to call his son a faggot or queer in an effort to curb girlie behavior.
2. In NYC, "it is disorderly conduct for one man to greet another on the street by placing the end of his thumb against the tip of his nose and wiggling the extended fingers of that hand."

North Carolina:
1. It is illegal to make love on the floor of a hotel room between two double beds.

Oklahoma:
1. Whale hunting is strictly forbidden.
2. People who make "ugly faces" at dogs may be fined and/or jailed.

Ohio:
1. In Columbus, it is illegal for stores to sell corn flakes on Sunday.
2. In Oxford, it is illegal for a woman to disrobe in front of a man's picture.
3. In Youngstown, it is illegal to run out of gas.

Oregon:
1. The town of Hood River prohibits the act of juggling without a license.

Pennsylvania:
1. "Any motorist who sights a team of horses coming toward him must pull well off the road, cover his car with a blanket or canvas that blends with the countryside, and let the horses pass. If the horses appear skittish, the motorist must take his car apart piece by piece, and hide it under the nearest bushes."

Rhode Island:
It is illegal to throw pickle juice on a trolley.

Tennessee:
1. It is illegal to use a lasso to catch a fish.
2. In Dyersburg, it is illegal for a woman to call a man for a date.
3. In Memphis, it is illegal for a woman to drive by herself; "a man must walk or run in front of the vehicle, waving a red flag in order to warn approaching pedestrians and motorists."

Texas:
1. The entire Encyclopedia Britannica is banned because it contains a formula for making beer at home.
2. It is illegal to milk another person's cow.

Utah:
A husband is responsible for every criminal act committed by his wife in his presence.

Virginia:
1. In Richmond, it is illegal to flip a coin in any eating establishment to determine who buys a cup of coffee.
2. In Lebanon, it is illegal to kick your wife out of bed.

Vermont:
1. It is illegal to deny the existence of God.
2. It is illegal to whistle underwater.
3. Women must obtain written permission from their husbands to wear false teeth.

What fun!

Yes. Yes. But all of these sound so reasonable. Even Moon1492 could not object to them. :confused:

[jimtron]

Here it is in PDF format:
http://wilkerson.110mb.com/index.htm

[Ausmerican]

Virginia:
1. In Richmond, it is illegal to flip a coin in any eating establishment to determine who buys a cup of coffee.
2. In Lebanon, it is illegal to kick your wife out of bed.


What fun!

Number 1 is fair enough but I must quibble with number 2. Does this apply even if she farted?

[moon1969]

Here are some racist zionist quotes:

"Spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it employment... Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly." Theodore Herzl, founder of the World Zionist Organization, referring to the Arabs of Palestine, Complete Diaries, entry for June 12, 1895 .

"In our country there is room only for the Jews. We shall say to the Arabs: Get out! If they don't agree, if they resist, we shall drive them out by force." Professor Ben-Zion Dinur, Israel 's First Minister of Education, 1954, from History of the Haganah, 1956.

"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population." Israel Koenig, ‘The Koenig Memorandum,’ 1976.

"[The Palestinians] are beasts walking on two legs." Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, speech to the Knesset quoted in New Statesman, June 25,1982 .

"We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves." Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re‑election of General Shlomo Lahat as mayor of Tel Aviv, 1983.

"We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel ..... We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours ... When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do will be to scurry around like drugged roaches in a bottle." -- Israeli Chief of Staff Rafael Eitan, Gad Becker, Yediot Ahronot, 13 Apr 83 and New York Times, 14 Apr 83 .

“I did nothing for the last 20 years. For Jewish Jerusalem I have done things. For East Jerusalem ? Nothing! Absolutely nothing! Actually, we did build the sewerage system and improve the water system. And do you know why? I’m sure you think we did it for their benefit. No way! We did it because we heard about cholera cases, and the Jews feared the spread of an epidemic.” Teddy Kollek, former mayor of Jerusalem .

"One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail." Rabbi Ya'acov Perin in his eulogy at the funeral of mass murderer Dr. Baruch Goldstein, cited in the New York Times, 28 Feb 94 .

Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg, head of the Kever Yossev Yeshiva in Nablus , stated: "The blood of the Jewish people is loved by the Lord; it is therefore redder and their life is preferable." The killing by a Jew of a non-Jew . . . is considered essentially a good deed, and Jews should therefore have no compunction about it. Yitzhak Ginsburg, "Five General Religious Duties Which Lie Behind the Act of the Saintly, Late Rabbi Baruch Goldstein, May his Blood be Avenged."

"Everybody has to move, run and grab as many (Palestinian) hilltops as they can to enlarge the (Jewish) settlements because everything we take now will stay ours . . . Everything we don't grab will go to them." Ariel Sharon , then Israeli Foreign Minister, Agence France Presse, 15 Nov 1998 .

Israeli Minister Rechavam Ze'evi will push for the invasion of Palestinian-ruled towns to end the resistance. He "wants to cleanse the West Bank of Palestinians. The Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza have to be transferred..." He also wants the army to unleash attack dogs on Palestinian demonstrators. Source: Suzanne Goldenberg, The Guardian, March 7, 2001

During a sermon, the influential Israeli Rabbi Ovadia Yosef exclaimed: "May the Holy Name visit retribution on the Arab heads, and cause their seed to be lost, and annihilate them." He added: "It is forbidden to have pity on them. We must give them missiles with relish, annihilate them. Evil ones, damnable ones." Source: Ha'aretz April 12, 2001

Deputy-Minister Boim and Knesset-Member Hazan declared: “All Muslims are murderers by birth. It is in their genes.”

If this had been said about the Jews on any TV program in Europe or America, the station chief would have been fired.
If this had been said about the Jews in any parliament in Europe or America, the member would have been forced to resign.
Only in Israel does such racist talk pass almost without reaction. In the State of "the Survivors of Racism", racism has now become routine. Gush Shalom advert in "Haaretz," 27 Feb 04.

[Doctor Evil]

From this (http://talmud.faithweb.com/) site:

Anti-Talmud accusations have a long history dating back to the 13th century when the associates of the Inquisition attempted to defame Jews and their religion [see Yitzchak Baer, A History of Jews in Christian Spain, vol. I pp. 150-185]. The early material compiled by hateful preachers like Raymond Martini and Nicholas Donin remain the basis of all subsequent accusations against the Talmud. Some are true, most are false and based on quotations taken out of context, and some are total fabrications [see Baer, ch. 4 f. 54, 82 that it has been proven that Raymond Martini forged quotations]. On the internet today we can find many of these old accusations being rehashed and this site is an attempt to correct the mistakes and put the true quotes into their proper perspective.



4] The Talmud has laws that are racist and anti-gentile
The fourth accusation is the one on which I will be focussing. Because today's Orthodox Jews still lead their lives based on the laws contained in the Talmud, it is incumbent upon Jews to understand and explain that their religious laws are not racist or derogatory to gentiles. Jewish law, as contained in the Talmud, treats gentiles with the proper respect due to a person created in the image of G-d. Their property and lives are honored and any (mis)quotes from the Talmud indicating otherwise need to be seen in their original language and context.
I will be showing the ENTIRE passages in both their original Hebrew or Aramaic and in translation. I will also be providing a fuller context by bringing other quotations on the topics from other parts of the Talmud. After seeing all of the quotations, a proper judgement can be rendered. I will also be showing how Jewish commentators and legalists have understood these passages throughout history.
Even if a reader would believe that these talmudic quotations are racist, if Jews have always understood them differently then Jews cannot be considered racist. Even if someone can twist the words of the Talmud to be hateful, if Jews have always understood the Talmud in a non-hateful way then the argument is meaningless. The real exercise is to find the (allegedly racist) talmudic influence on Jews and Judaism and by perusing through the post-talmudic literature we can clearly find that this talmudic influence was not racist.
Is the Talmud racist or anti-gentile? No. But neither is it a universalist manifesto. It is a religious document written by those of the Jewish religion for others of the same faith. It favors Judaism over other religions and sets down rules on how to live in both an all-Jewish society and a mixed society. It legislates how to create vibrant Jewish communities while still maintaining respect for the gentile society. Universalists would have everyone be treated exactly equally and live in non-denominational communities. However, the Talmud, which is concerned for the survival of the Jewish religion, must weigh both the respect for humanity and the need for Jewish survival throughout thousands of years of minority-status.
What we will demonstrate is that the consideration for the Jewish community NEVER relegates those outside of this community to an inhuman status. Gentiles are ALWAYS respected and their rights are secured.
The anti-talmudic lies are exactly that - lies. The wisdom of the Talmud has sustained Judaism for thousands of years and perhaps its very success is what has engendered so much jealous hatred.


Here is the part (http://talmud.faithweb.com/articles/jesus.html) which supposedly refers to Jesus:
The Text
Sanhedrin 106a
http://talmud.faithweb.com/images/jesus1.jpg
R. Yochanan said (regarding Balaam): In the beginning a prophet, in the end a sorcerer.
Rav Papa said: As people say, "She was the descendant of princes and rulers, she played the harlot with carpenters."

Here we come to the common distortion that references in the talmud to Balaam are really veiled references to Jesus. As we shall soon see, Balaam is not a talmudic codeword for Jesus. Therefore, the passage above is referring solely to Balaam and not to Jesus. Besides this fact, read the passage closely and you will see that Rav Papa is offering a parable that explains R. Yochanan's statement. It is impossible to read R. Yochanan's statement as referring to Jesus and Rav Papa's as referring to Jesus' mother.
R. Yochanan is saying that Balaam had tremendous potential and started out as a true prophet of G-d. However, he turned to evil and in the end of his life became a sorcerer (i.e. user of black magic). This tradition regarding Balaam's descent was also recorded in the Tanchuma [Balak, 5] and in Yalkut Shimoni [Numbers, 771].
Rav Papa adds a parable to explain this. Consider a woman who is married to a powerful ruler who leads their people out into battle. She is used to being the wife of someone strong, whose powerful hands can skillfully manipulate a sword and overcome any opponents. If her husband were to die she would still want to marry someone in a similar position of leadership and strength. Even if this widow is continually passed over by those she wishes to marry, she will still strive for her former glory, and will even marry a carpenter who, while not leading his countrymen out into battle, still must skillfully handle tools. Even when the ability to reach her old glory is obviously absent, she will still try everything possible to reach any position that remotely resembles it.
Similarly, Balaam started out as a man with prophecy (like a prince or ruler). He was capable of seeing the future and even manipulating it through his curses and blessings. However, when he lost that gift when G-d removed his prophecy, Balaam still wanted to see the future, even resorting to such pale comparisons as sorcery and black magic (like a carpenter). This passage has absolutely nothing to do with Jesus and there is certainly no insult implied towards Mary.


I think its time for ignore.

[Greediguts]

Vermont:
1. It is illegal to deny the existence of God.


Not too many atheists up in Vermont I guess...........

[jimtron]

The Talmud forbids remote linking? WTF!@#$

[Cavemonster]

We've done this before, with the exact same copy-pasted mistranslations you're bringing here again Moon.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=125743

I would like to adhere to the JREF user agreement that urges that we attack the argument and not the person.

That said-

I think your argument is idiotic, it is obviously incapable of intelligent thought or the smallest amount of research. I think your argument's parents should be ashamed to have spawned such an ill-formed, dim-witted thing. Your argument is clearly ignorant of the search function, or else it would realize that it had already been decapitated. Perhaps your argument is merely a basement dwelling troll? Finally, I believe that your argument should go and die in a fire.

Thank you.

[NobbyNobbs]

Here are some racist zionist quotes:


Thank you. I was running low.

[Alex Libman]

Ancient Hebrew theocracy with its tyrannical laws - yuck!

Modern democracy with its tyrannical laws - yuck!

Oh, how far we've come...

But, yeah, ancient societies found ethnocentrism convenient, modern ones don't.

So... yaay modernity! :rolleyes:

[arthwollipot]

It's true! Christianity does not have a monopoly on dickery.

[Gregory]

What do toilet demons have to do with racism?

[Tricky]

The thread Talmud a racist book? (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4241860#post4241860) has been merged with an earlier nearly identical thread, Are These Accusations Against the Talmud True? (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=125743)
Please stay on topic and do not make personal attacks. Mod is watching you.

[linusrichard]

The Talmud forbids remote linking? WTF!@#$

The Talmud forbids remote linking for filthy gentiles.

[Jono]

Sanhedrin 58b. If a heathen (gentile) hits a Jew, the gentile must be killed.

Sanhedrin 57a . A Jew need not pay a gentile ("Cuthean") the wages owed him for work.

Baba Kamma 37b. "If an ox of an Israelite gores an ox of a Canaanite there is no liability; but if an ox of a Canaanite gores an ox of an Israelite...the payment is to be in full."


Baba Mezia 24a . If a Jew finds an object lost by a gentile ("heathen") it does not have to be returned. (Affirmed also in Baba Kamma 113b). Sanhedrin 76a. God will not spare a Jew who "marries his daughter to an old man or takes a wife for his infant son or returns a lost article to a Cuthean..."

...

Baba Kamma 113a. Jews may use lies ("subterfuges") to circumvent a Gentile.



Giving Dilling/Hoffman extracted critiques/quotes, how unexpected (not).

There is little reason to, by any stretch of the imagination, deny that the Talmud of Judaism is a volumnous work with a maze-like frame of thought, legal debates and judaic values where one can find matters not above, below nor beyond criticism. Neither is this a reason to assume any criticism thereof is right on the money or even valid in its attempt to reflect the frames aformentioned. I will proceed with an example of such a criticism where it is found wanting in its portrayal concerning a few quotes of the Babylonian Talmud.

In Michael A. Hoffman's work, ”The Truth About The Talmud”, he describes a passage from the talmudic tractate ”Baba Kamma” as meaning ”Jews have superior legal status”, namely from Baba Kamma 37b of the Soncino English translation of the Babylonian Talmud.

The passage he referrs to thereof reads;

”If an ox of an Israelite gores an ox of a Canaanite there is no liability; but if an ox of a Canaanite gores an ox of an Israelite...the payment is to be in full."

It would appear, as is claimed by Hoffman, to show it is granted for Jews to be generally unfair in trade with all other non-jews. While it isn't erronous to propose legal values being more of benifit, within a jewish community, for jewish people than for non jewish people thereof, it needs further clarification. The footnote of the above reads;
As Canaanites did not recognise the laws of social justice, they did not impose any liability for damage done by cattle. They could consequently not claim to be protected by a law they neither recognised nor respected, cf. J. T. a.l. and Maim. Yad, Niz. Mam. VIII, 5. to add drunkedness to thirst: The Lord will not spare him.”
-- Sanhedrin, folio 76b, Soncino Babylonian Talmud


This quote does certainly offer us an example of a notably unfair and anti-gentile sentiment on withholding an object from a non-jew, yet let us take a look at the footnote on this passage;
”Deut. XXIX, 18ff. i.e., the associations involved in these practices are displeasing in the eyes of the Lord. [How bitter must have been the persecution of the Jews under Ardeshir (v. Funk, op. cit 1, pp 66 ff.) to have provoked gentle Rab to this harsh utterance.”


As we can see, the previously cited passage of the Sanhedrin tractate, is not imposing any legislative decision or creed, no halakah (jewish law) is given in support of the above, which also explains why this utterence is lamented upon by the footnote commentary.

Hoffman referenced another passage, from Baba Mezia, in his attempt to strengthen the validity of his criticism that jews may steal from non-jews which he have yet to see any proof of. Let us take a look at the next quote cited;
"If one finds therein a lost object, then if the majority are Israelites it has to be announced, but if the majority are heathens it has not to be announced.”
-- Baba Mezia, folio 24a, Soncino Babylonian Talmud



The confusing part here appears to be the latter segment, ”has not to be announced”. What does that mean? Well to give a basic rendering of what this means it will suffice to say that where a jewish citizen finds a lost object then it is up to him, upon his next trip to a place of announcement (generally in pre-second Diaspora it was Jerusalem), to make an announcement is in a public place, that he has found something with no knowledge of who the owner is. For an eligable owner to claim the object as his, he must offer the announcer some proof of ownership, by describing the object or otherwise identifying it. Furthermore, if three holidays has passed without anyone stepping up to claim the article as his, then finder's keeper's so to speak.

A footnote to the above discussion in Baba Mezia 24 says:
”Heathens do not return lost articles (v. infra p. 152, n. 3), and consequently do not come within the provision of the law relating to the announcement of finds. Moreover, according to Tosaf., even if it were certain that the article belonged to an Israelite, there would be no need to return it because the owner, presuming that a heathen found it, would despair of recovering it. v. B.K. (Sonc. ed.) p. 666. Baba Mezia, p. 149, n. 6."


The above footnote refers as well to another footnote in Baba Mezia 24b, saying;
”and as the majority of the inhabitants of the place are heathens who do not return lost articles, the owner must be assumed to have abandoned the hope of recovering the lost goods.”

As of yet it is clear that these discussions do not imply it being legal for jewish people to steal objects from non-jews, it simply explains that if an object is lost then it should be taken to a place of announcment and wait for the owner to show up, but also that if a lost object is found in the lands of a heathen, then the laws on announcement are rendered moot since such a place is assumed not to exist and the finder does not know who the object belongs to.

However, let is continue with more firm clarifications on whether or not a jewish person can take an object found and purposely circumvent the return of it to its rightful owner. In Baba Kamma 113 there is a reference to a quote by Rabbi Phineas saying;
”where there was a danger of causing a profanation of the Name, even the retaining of a lost article of a heathen is a crime.”


The profanation of God's Name occurs when the retaining of a lost article, belonging to anyone, is kept by the finder when the finder knows who the owner is, while the Baba Mezia discussions are not talking about a situation where the owner is known. If the finder does not know who the owner is of the article/object and no ways to aquire his identity, he can keep it as it does not enter into the property laws. This quote is followed by;

”Samuel said: Their mistakes are permitted. Like when Samuel bought from a gentile a golden bowl (with the seller thinking it was bronze) for four zuz and accidentally paid him one zuz less.”.

A quick read might have this sentence appear to be an argument against Rabbi Phineas’ general declaration. It is not. Furthermore it is not talking about it being ok to steal from a gentile, rather that in any business deal one is responsible for the price offered for an object. So, if a gentile offers a gold bowl, believing it is of bronze and setting the price thereof, the jewish buyer is not required to correct him that it is gold and thus pay more. It also explains how, if the jewish buyer accidentally paid too little and the gentile did not count his money, the jewish buyed (when or if realising his mistake) is not demanded to correct the purchase. Thus Rabbi Samuel mentions elsewhere in the Talmud;

”[I]It is forbidden to deceive anyone, even an idolatrous gentile”.
-- Chullin, folio 94a, Soncino Babylonian Talmud.


We have therefore been hereby provided with an actual example of how it is legal, not to steal but, for a jew to profit upon the careless purchase or sale of an object by a gentile if the sale is not met with contemporary objections by the gentile. A jew is not allowed to, by the Talmud, to purposely trick the gentile, he is however allowed to benifit from a gentile's mistake in sales.

If the above has not made anyone the wiser on what jewish laws actually says on this matter, it might be a good idea to cite a piece of halakah that encompass the above legal debacle. The Mishneh Torah, composed by Rabbi Maimonides as a codification of jewish law (halakah) says;
” And similiarly, lies, tricks, subterfuges, cheatings, and circumventions of gentiles are forbidden. They said [as quoted above] 'It is forbidden to deceive anyone, even an idolatrous gentile' and even more so when it can lead to the desecration of G-d's name. For that is a great sin and imbues in a person bad traits. And all these wicked actions G-d explained that He will be disgusted with them and with those who perform them, as it says: (Deuteronomy 18:12) "For anyone who does these is an abomination of G-d.”
-- Misneh Torah, commentary by Maimonides on Keilim 12:7


Considering the examples and contexts of what we've gone through above, it stands to reason that the methodology and conclusions thereof given by Hoffman are found wanting. They do not succeed in providing his attached claims or his elaborations of them with convincing, encompassive nor correct interpretation of the quoted material. Therefore we are forced to conclude the argued quotes not to be sufficient in sustaining his argued case.

[Jono]

I do lack Talmudic literacy. That's why I ask those who are Talmudically literate for help in understanding it instead of making up my own interpretations based on my Talmudic illiteracy.

If you have any further specific inquiries concerning the Talmud or related commentary, Mishnah, Mishneh Torah, Shulchan Aruch et al, feel free to pm me.

[NobbyNobbs]

....

AHA! I found the one about sex with a three year old.

It doesn't say it's legal or allowed: It's an example of the ramifications of loss of the maidenhead vs. the loss of virginity.

It talks about a boy having sex with a woman, and how that's like being, "injured," with a stick, and if a man has sex with a 3 year old girl, how it's like her having a finger stuck in her eye.

In the first case, the woman can still be be considered a virgin, even though the maidenhead is taken, probably because the kid's shooting blanks. It's like loosing her maidenhead by falling on a stick.

The three year-old girl isn't guilty of anything because something was done to her, not by her, and, while the damage is like being blinded, it was an assault against her, so it wasn't her fault, so she's still a virgin.

Well - that's how I read it, anyhow.

Interestingly, this sort of thought process is exactly what the Talmud is meant to foster. Congratulations, Gagglegnash! Not only have you discovered yourself a new tool, you're even holding it by the right end!

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. Shabbath 86a-86b.


Obligated by whom? I've never said that prayer, but no one has come yet to take my Jew License away.

[Thunder]

The Jewish Talmud indeed does appear to be very bigoted against Cutheans and Canaanites.

Good thing these people don't exist anymore.

Now, is it true that Martin Luther said it was ok to burn Jews' houses, Synagogues, and businessess?

Is it true that Paul falsely accused "the Jews" of crusifying Jesus? Even though we know crusifixion was a Roman punishment for Roman criminals, and there is no way that all 3,000,000 Jews of Judaea could have possibly all voted to kill Jesus and save Bar-Abbas?

Is it true that Bar-Abbas' full name was Jesus Bar-Abbas? Which means "Jesus.... Son of the Father"??? What are the religous implications of this name?

Is it true that Roman Catholics bow down and pray to statues of dieties? Is this not forbidden by God?

Is it true, that Judaism DOES NOT require Gentiles convert to Judaism inorder to be favorable in God's eyes?

Is it true that Judaism has the "Laws of Noah", which are the laws that Gentiles, not Jews, must abide by inorder to be loved by God?





Are the following accusations against the Talmud true? Or are they twistings of scripture?

Excerpt


Quote:
Moed Kattan 17a: If a Jew is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there.

Erubin 21b. Whosoever disobeys the rabbis deserves death and will be punished by being boiled in hot excrement in hell.

Sanhedrin 58b. If a heathen (gentile) hits a Jew, the gentile must be killed.

Sanhedrin 57a . A Jew need not pay a gentile ("Cuthean") the wages owed him for work.

Baba Kamma 37b. "If an ox of an Israelite gores an ox of a Canaanite there is no liability; but if an ox of a Canaanite gores an ox of an Israelite...the payment is to be in full."


Baba Mezia 24a . If a Jew finds an object lost by a gentile ("heathen") it does not have to be returned. (Affirmed also in Baba Kamma 113b). Sanhedrin 76a. God will not spare a Jew who "marries his daughter to an old man or takes a wife for his infant son or returns a lost article to a Cuthean..."

Sanhedrin 57a . When a Jew murders a gentile ("Cuthean"), there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a gentile he may keep.

Baba Kamma 37b. The gentiles are outside the protection of the law and God has "exposed their money to Israel."

Baba Kamma 113a. Jews may use lies ("subterfuges") to circumvent a Gentile.

Yebamoth 98a. All gentile children are animals.

Abodah Zarah 36b. Gentile girls are in a state of niddah (filth) from birth.

Abodah Zarah 22a-22b . Gentiles prefer sex with cows.

http://www.revisionisthistory.org/talmudtruth.html

[Thunder]

I wonder, if you believe that all these quotes about the Judaism are true, what do you think should happen to Judaism? What do you think should happen to the Jews?

Convert us? Exile us? Kill us?

You know, if Christians had not been killing us since Constantine's time, maybe the Jews would have a slightly better opinion of Christains. You cant hate, rape, exile, assault, and kill a people for 2,000 years...and expect them to love you.

The fact that Jews have somewhat gotten over our fear of Christians, is just amazing.

[Puppycow]

Baba Kamma 37b. "If an ox of an Israelite gores an ox of a Canaanite there is no liability; but if an ox of a Canaanite gores an ox of an Israelite...the payment is to be in full."

Ah, so that's where that saying about "it depends whose ox is gored" originally comes from. I never knew.

[Radrook]

If you have any further specific inquiries concerning the Talmud or related commentary, Mishnah, Mishneh Torah, Shulchan Aruch et al, feel free to pm me.

Thanx for the explanations provided in the post above.
Will pm you if I have further questions.

[Radrook]

I wonder, if you believe that all these quotes about the Judaism are true, what do you think should happen to Judaism? What do you think should happen to the Jews?

Convert us? Exile us? Kill us?

You know, if Christians had not been killing us since Constantine's time, maybe the Jews would have a slightly better opinion of Christains. You cant hate, rape, exile, assault, and kill a people for 2,000 years...and expect them to love you.

The fact that Jews have somewhat gotten over our fear of Christians, is just amazing.


What do you think Jesus would have said to those people who claimed to be his followers and who persecuted the Jews?

[Radrook]

The Jewish Talmud indeed does appear to be very bigoted against Cutheans and Canaanites.

Good thing these people don't exist anymore.

Now, is it true that Martin Luther said it was OK to burn Jews' houses, Synagogues, and businesses?

Is it true that Paul falsely accused "the Jews" of crucifying Jesus? Even though we know crucifixion was a Roman punishment for Roman criminals, and there is no way that all 3,000,000 Jews of Judaea could have possibly all voted to kill Jesus and save Bar-Abbas?

Is it true that Bar-Abbas' full name was Jesus Bar-Abbas? Which means "Jesus.... Son of the Father"??? What are the religious implications of this name?

Is it true that Roman Catholics bow down and pray to statues of deities? Is this not forbidden by God?

Is it true, that Judaism DOES NOT require Gentiles convert to Judaism in order to be favorable in God's eyes?

Is it true that Judaism has the "Laws of Noah", which are the laws that Gentiles, not Jews, must abide by in order to be loved by God?


1. If Martin Luther encouraged that kind of trash then he was a hypocritical sinner.

2. Yes, idolatry is forbidden. If Roman Catholics pray to statues then they are sinning. Roman Catholics, however will deny that they are praying to statues. They will say they are praying to what the statues represent.

3. I don't know what the name Bar-Abbas means nor am I familiar with any implications in reference to it. I thought that "Ben" was supposed to mean son not "Bar."

4. I never understood Paul to be accusing the whole nation since obviously he himself and most early converts to Christianity were Jews. Furthermore there were crowds of Jews who followed Jesus so the whole nation was obviously not involved.


Matthew 12:15
But when Jesus knew it, he withdrew himself from thence: and great multitudes followed him, and he healed them all;

Matthew 13:2
And great multitudes were gathered together unto him, so that he went into a ship, and sat; and the whole multitude stood on the shore.

Matthew 8:1
When he was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed him.

John 6:10
And Jesus said, Make the men sit down. Now there was much grass in the place. So the men sat down, in number about five thousand.

Acts 4:4
Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand.



Even among the religious leaders Jesus had followers one of which was Gamaliel. Paul even wrote a letter to the Hebrews and said that they had been blessed by G-d to receive the holy writings.

5. About what Jews require of gentiles to be saved, as I said, I am not familiar with the Talmud or any other non canonical Jewish writings. I am familiar with the OT however and based on it appears as if conversion was required. However, prophecies spoke of a time when all nations would be brought into harmony with G-d. So the exclusion was not viewed as permanent.

6. Well, Noah and his was given certain instructions as recorded in Genesis but they are very brief. Restriction to eat blood.
Permission to eat animal meat. A warning about murder. Permission to punish murder by taking the murderer's life. There is no scriptural basis to restrict those laws to gentiles.

Genesis 9
1And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.

2And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered.

3Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

4But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

5And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man.

6Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

7And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein.

8And God spake unto Noah, and to his sons with him, saying,

9And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you;

[gtc]

Is it true that Roman Catholics bow down and pray to statues of dieties?

No. It's not true.

[a_unique_person]

No. It's not true.

As a reformed Catholic (that is, an atheist), I have to disagree.

The worship of Mary is very much an appropriation of Roman gods and worship. In Catholic churches, she gets her own altar, her own religious orders, people pray directly to her. They deny it is, of course, but in practice, I can't see how any sane person could say otherwise.

[Darth Rotor]

Is it true that Roman Catholics bow down and pray to statues of dieties?
No, generally. AUP, I am not sure where you went through your catechism, but worshipping Mary is non-doctrinal, and technically a violation of the canon. The prayers to Mary asking for intercession with The Father (who as part of the Trinity is the object of worship) is certainly doctrinal. Not sure if you appreciate the distinction. Heck, I am not sure how many Catholics appreciate that distinction. However, there is no question in RCC dogma that Mary was mortal, not divine, and as Mother of God gets a special place in the Afterlife/Heaven. The Ave Maria/Hail Mary prayer, so commonly used, asks Mary, who canon says was spirited away bodily into Heaven and has the ear of God, to put in a good word for you. (More on that below)

You can ask, as I have, that if one prays to Mary and prays to God, how is that different? A first come back is: I drive a car and I drive a truck, that does not make a car a truck. I feed my bird and I feed my dog, but a bird is not a dog. One prays to Mary and one prays to God, but Mary is not God. Whether or not she has become Divine, an angel rather than a super saint, I'll not delve into for that path leads to madness.

@ parky That said: there is within the Catholic Church a cult of Mary that IMO needs a slap to the face, doctrinally. Your impression that this cult is pervasive/universal is not quite on target. I've met a few through my wife's circle of friends among Catholic Daughters, and it's a bit unnerving sometimes to talk with them. FWIW, given where I live, it will not surprise you to find that this faction locally is predominantly of Mexican/Hispanic descent. Our Lady of Guadalupe has many rabid fans in this part of the world.

Radrok, I recommend you hit the on line Catholic doctrine statements and get a grip on what the RCC doctrine is on the statuary. I'd recommend an official site, vatican.com or somesuch. ETA: from the Catholic Encyclopedia.
The crucifix is the principal ornament of the altar. It is placed on the altar to recall to the mind of the celebrant, and the people, that the Victim offered on the altar is the same as was offered on the Cross. For this reason the crucifix must be placed on the altar as often as Mass is celebrated (Constit., Accepimus of Benedict XIV, 16 July, 1746).
Pithy it ain't.
Roman Catholics, however will deny that they are praying to statues. They will say they are praying to what the statues represent.
The second sentence is the RCC position. (OK, I am not the Pope, it is the RCC position as I understand it.)
FWIW:
Closely related to this doctrine is that of Mary as Mediatrix of All Graces, which affirms that all graces Christ obtains for humanity are dispensed by and through Mary. The Second Vatican Council also touched on this subject when it stated that "the Blessed Virgin's salutary influence on men... flows from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on His mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it" (Lumen gentium 60). This also has not been formally affirmed by the pope, but it is popular among many Catholics.

A lay Catholic organization, the Vox Populi Mariae Mediatrici (Voice of the People for Mary Mediatrix), has been founded with the goal of winning formal recognition of the "fifth doctrine of Mary," which includes Mary as Coredemptrix, Mediatrix of All Graces, and Advocate for the People of God. The organization is currently collecting signatures that will be included with a letter to the Pope asking that he "define and proclaim the Blessed Virgin Mary as Coredemptrix, Mediatrix of all grace and Advocate for the People of God." http://www.religionfacts.com/christianity/beliefs/mary.htm

The evolution of doctrine continues, keeping the Cardinals busy.

[Safe-Keeper]

As a reformed Catholic (that is, an atheist)I may just steal that one for... something or other. Something might surface.

[Darth Rotor]

As a reformed Catholic (that is, an atheist), I have to disagree.
Wait, I thought a reformed Catholic was a Lutheran or a Calvinist. Does this make a Protestant an atheist? :confused:
The worship of Mary is very much an appropriation of Roman gods and worship. In Catholic churches, she gets her own altar, her own religious orders, people pray directly to her.
Praying to her does not make her an object of worship. See other post, since some people do indeed fall into that trap.
They deny it is, of course, but in practice, I can't see how any sane person could say otherwise.
I don't think anyone in communion within the Catholic Church would deny that they pray to Mary. Ave Maria is probably the most common prayer, after the Lord's Prayer/Our Father. Hmm, given the nature of the Rosary, maybe it is more commonly said. Hmmm.

DR

[Jono]

I don't know what the name Bar-Abbas means nor am I familiar with any implications in reference to it. I thought that "Ben" was supposed to mean son not "Bar."


Well Bar, Ben, Bnei are all variants of "son of". "Bar" just happens to be the aramaic spelling I believe.

[tomwaits]

2. People who make "ugly faces" at dogs may be fined and/or jailed.

This one seems reasonable. Making threatening faces at a dog can make them upset and dangerous.

[Radrook]

Radrok, I recommend you hit the on line Catholic doctrine statements and get a grip on what the RCC doctrine is on the statuary. I'd recommend an official site, vatican.com or somesuch. ETA: from the Catholic Encyclopedia.


You misunderstood me.
I don't believe Catholics worship the statues.

[gtc]

As a reformed Catholic (that is, an atheist), I have to disagree.

The worship of Mary is very much an appropriation of Roman gods and worship. In Catholic churches, she gets her own altar, her own religious orders, people pray directly to her. They deny it is, of course, but in practice, I can't see how any sane person could say otherwise.

They pray to Mary not to the statue.

[a_unique_person]

They pray to Mary not to the statue.

As I said, they deny it, but in practice, that's what it amounts to. I'm just going on the empirical evidence. My cousin's wife was a real Mary freak. Organising religious parades of her statue, for example. After watching "Rome" and it's portrayal of the Gods, I'm guessing I know where the worship of Mary came from, it was just one more Catholic appropriation of a pagan custom, like Xmas.

[a_unique_person]

A lay Catholic organization, the Vox Populi Mariae Mediatrici (Voice of the People for Mary Mediatrix), has been founded with the goal of winning formal recognition of the "fifth doctrine of Mary," which includes Mary as Coredemptrix, Mediatrix of All Graces


Thanks for the lolz :).

You can't make this stuff up.