Religion: Earliest Haters: Talmud
Irving Spielberg forwards "The Earliest Haters". I post it because WAIS does not exercise censorship, and I make no comment, since I know nothing about the Talmud. Here is what Irving Spìelberg says: If you can't guess the people I have in mind, I'll give you some clues---clues found in a major world religion that is many centuries old. I'll call it Religion X. Religion X traces its roots back to the First Couple, Adam and Eve. They were on earth before any other form of worship---before Islam (appearing 14 centuries ago), before Hinduism or Buddhism (appearing 25 centuries ago), before even the worship of various gods in Mesopotamia (60 centuries ago). Early on, Religion X'ers were told by their God: "Love your neighbor---and even the stranger who dwells among you---as much as you love yourself." But it wasn't long before Religion X began rebelling against the laws of the One who had blessed and preserved it so much. In response God warned: "All those who hate me love death."
After centuries of hating their God (which predictably led to hatred of fellow humans, God's creations), Religion X'ers were allowed by God to be conquered and transported to ancient Babylon where they experienced a 1,600-year-long "vacation." If you haven't guessed yet, the religion I'm describing is Judaism, the religion of my people. But don't stop reading. The most shocking stuff is just ahead! While in Babylon, the "wise men" among our people began formulating new laws which supposedly supplemented and explained the time-tested Old Testament writings. But the new rules actually contradicted and eventually replaced the original laws! The "new and improved" laws are collectively known as the Talmud. Even though rabbis are Talmudic experts, probably not one Jew in a thousand (and not one non-Jew in ten thousand) knows what is in the Talmud. Without further delay, here's some of the Talmud's "wisdom" (plus sources):
(I) THE TALMUD HATES SCIENCE:
Hyenas turn into bats after seven years, and later on turn into thorns and demons (Baba Kamma, 16a).
Being naked in front of a lamp causes epilepsy (Pesahim, 112b).
There's medicinal value in dirt found in an outhouse's shadow, also in a white dog's excrement (Gittin, 69a,b).
(II) THE TALMUD HATES FEMALES:
The birth of a girl is an unhappy event (Baba Bathra, 16b).
It is never good to talk too much to women including one's own wife (Aboth, 1.5).
All women are "temperamentally light-headed" (Kiddushin, 80b).
It is okay to divorce your wife if she spoils your food, or if you find a more beautiful woman (Gittin, 91a).
(III) THE TALMUD HATES CHILDREN:
It is lawful for a girl three years old to have sexual intercourse (Abodah Zarah, 37a; Kethuboth, 11b,39a; Sanhedrin, 55b,69a,b; Yebamoth, 12a,57b,58a,60b).
When a man commits sodomy with a boy under nine years of age, it "is not deemed as pederasty" (Sanhedrin, 54b,55a).
Sexual intercourse with a boy under the age of eight is lawful since it isn't fornication (Sanhedrin, 69b). (In other words, Religion X became X-rated! Is it any wonder that many Jewish persons today are liberally involved with the current sexual revolution and are even favorable towards legalization of adult-child sex?)
(IV) THE TALMUD HATES ALL NON-JEWS:
Since all Gentiles are only animals, all Gentile children are bastards (Yebamoth, 98a).
When a non-Jew robs a Jew, he has to pay him back, but if a Jew robs a non-Jew, he doesn't have to pay him back. Moreover, when a Gentile kills a Jew, the Gentile must be killed, but when a Jew kills a Gentile, "there is no death penalty" (Sanhedrin, 57a).
It is okay to "use subterfuges" in a court of law in order to cheat a non-Jew (Baba Kamma, 113a).
(V) THE TALMUD HATES CHRIST AND CHRISTIANS:
Jesus was born a bastard (Jewish Encyclopedia, "Jesus"; Yebamoth, 49b).
Mary, the mother of Jesus, was a whore and "played the harlot with carpenters" (Sanhedrin, 106a,b).
Jesus "practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostacy" (Sanhedrin, 43a).
Jesus was punished and sent to Hell where he ended up in "boiling hot excrement" (Gittin, 56b,57a).
Christians will go to Hell "and be punished there for all generations" (Rosh Hashanah, 17a).
Those who read "the works of the Judeo-Christians, i.e., the New Testament" will end up in Hell (Sanhedrin,0a). The books of the Christians "may not be saved from a fire, but they must be burnt in their place, they and the Divine Names occurring in them" (Shabbath, 116a).
(Now you know what's been inspiring many of the anti-Christian attitudes and actions these days.)
By roughly 500 A.D. Jewish scribes had completed the voluminous Talmud, the written version of what had long been the Jews' oral tradition---the tradition that Jesus condemns in the 23rd chapter of Matthew and other parts of the New Testament.
Whenever anyone claims that for 1500 years the Talmud needlessly aggravated Gentiles (who in turn put Jews into ghettos and even the Holocaust), Jews can look at even earlier history and claim that the "anti-Jewishness" of the New Testament forced Jews to hit back with their printed version of the Talmud. Actually the New Testament, like a newspaper, merely reflects the true condition of Judaism at that time. If someone could prove that damaging descriptions of Jews never appeared before the New Testament, that would be one thing. But during many centuries prior to Jesus or any Christians, Jews were saying and doing the same things that we find them still saying and doing during New Testament days! If the New Testament record of their words and works is "anti-Semitic," is the Old Testament record of the same rebelliousness just as "anti-Semitic"? A while ago I was talking with a young woman in Los Angeles who is training to become a rabbi. I asked her about the Talmud. (She seemed shocked I should know so much about it already!) "Oh," she said, "I don't think it's as relevant as it once was." When I told her that the "hate" movie "The Last Temptation of Christ" was an amazingly accurate reflection of the Talmud---and that more such "hate" films are in the works because Hollywood takes the Talmud seriously---she had no explanation. In the future when "hate" laws are passed, will the incredibly hate-filled Talmud and some hate-promoting film studios be swept under the rug?
RH: I repeat that I am incompetent to make any comment. I will WAISly post scholarly rebuttals, but not simple expressions of anger.
Irving is right, that the New Testament reflects the reality of prejudice by Jews against non-Jews. Is the implication that it may continue to this day? In some senses, at least in my personal experience, it does. My daughter had a close Jewish friend in high school in San Carlos who was eventually banned from coming to our house once the parents learned we were serious Christians. If the parents had been deeply religious, I could have appreciated it, even though we never made the slightest attempt to "evangelize." But in fact their daughter complained, "my folks do nothing religious, so I don't know what they are afraid of." This then raised the issue in her mind and in ours: "Is this not the very prejudice in reverse, that we seek to eliminate against Jews?"
RH: It is an extraordinary situation. A Jew who married a goy was often shunned by his/her family. I have several Jewish friends who have married Christian women, and they seem to be perfectly happy. In one case I regard the family as exemplary. I have decided that WAIS must discuss religions without fear or favor. All religious groups may object, but it seems to be the only way to clear the air. As for the Talmud, the question is simply: Are the quotations given by Spielberg accurate? If so, what has been the impact of the Tamud on young minds? See Morris Adler, The World of the Talmud (1958) It was the central subject of the curriculum of Jewish schools. I would seem to be comparable to the indoctrination given to young Muslims in the schools which have received so much critisism.
Regarding Irving Spielberg's "The Earliest Haters"., Hank Levin writes: There is no "Irving Spielberg" who is a scholar who wanted to initiate the "scholarly and dispassionate debate" that you suggest. This was taken from the url that is set out above, a virulent anti-semitic website which you found or someone sent you. It has been on the web since 2001. This is not an honest way of introducing a "debate" to a WAIS community. Either deliberately or inadvertently you have violated the conditions under which you are using the University website.
RH: I received the e-mail, which it turns out appeared in the Naional Journal (!/1/04). I do not know why Hank says there is no Irving Spielberg, I said I would post scholarly replies but not angry rebuttals. I therefore ask Hank to provide a scholarly commentary refuting the statements in the posting. I hope Hank's last statement is not an attempt to censor WAIS. I repeat that I know nothing about the Talmud, but I will of course post Hank's scholarly comments, which I await with impatience.
Hank Levin has sent a message about Irving Spielberg's piece on the Torah. Here are the key passages. You did not list the url that I sent. What are Mr. “Irving Spielberg’s” scholarly credentials, and which languages has he mastered to read and translate the Talmud in order to “clarify” for Waiser’s the meanings as a scholar since presumedly he is a Talmudic scholar. You should also know that for Jews the Torah is Law, not the Talmud. The Talmud is a discussion and debate on the meaning of Jewish text, and its opinions are not binding on Jewish practice. Perhaps you will now print out excerpts from The Protocols of Zion or Mein Kampf and ask WAISER’s to engage in scholarly discourse on the assertions of these lofty documents.
RH: If I did not post the url, it was inadvertent. Here it is: http://globalfire.tv/nj/04en/letters/2004jan_02.htm. Hank simply does not provide the scholarly rebuttal I asked for. Of course we would discuss the Protocols of Zion or Mein Kampf; it would be most interesting. We will not allow any group, wherever placed on the ideological spectrum, to dictate what WAIS can and cannot discuss. Die Luft der Freiheit weht.