If you haven't already please catch up with posts #1 and #2 for more info and resources.
Know Thy Talmud #1 (The Talmud Conspiracy)
Know Thy Talmud #2 (Citation Difficulty)
Basically every real position of power is held either by Jews or people strongly connected to them, those Jews more or else follow their Rabbis who follow the Talmud, as discussed before, the Talmud is a massive book which is the "moral basis" of Judaism. (Jews do not really follow the Torah, they follow the Talmud). It's important to know what it says, because from it, you will learn the plans of the parasites (so called elites). In other posts I can explore its occult connections.
Please note that due to its massive size and number of authors, the Talmud contains pretty much everything, contradictory info, things which can be interpreted as "moral", but the Rabbis always seem to follow the worst parts of it. For example, occupying Palestine is strictly forbidden in the Talmud until the messiah comes, you are not allowed to hasten his coming (Neturei Karta), but the Rabbis do what is more beneficial to them and can always find a piece of text that allows it and even orders it!
Additionally, the Talmud is about putting rules on every aspect of the Jew life, how, what and when you can eat, detailed farming laws, if you can or cannot have anal sex (The Rabbis ruled that it's ok, the wise Rabbis explained: your wife is a piece of meat, you can have it fried or boiled!)
What else does it say:
1-You are to enslave all non Jews, the correct slave number for each one of the chosen people is 2820 goy slaves.
2-Human and child sacrifice is very much alive in the Talmud!!
3-You are not allowed to help a non-jew, it's a sin to help them, and you are blessed if you harm them, only help them if you must to avoid harm yourself. In fact you should aim to kill as many goys as possible (possible contradiction with #1, but I think the idea is kill as many as you can then enslave the rest, and hey it's the Talmud, it's full of contradictions)
You learn from this, that the jew will not waste a good opportunity of harming goys (taken your "jab" yet?)
4-Incest, pedophilia, bestiality are all permitted! Impossible to believe I know, but now you understand where they will be taking us!!! They have rules and disputations on how A master Rabbi (priestly class) is allowed to marry a woman who had sex with an animal, they then rule that it's OK!! Otherwise no Rabbi will be able to find a wife!!
Please note there are some restrictions, and rules and regulation which you need to consult with your Rabbi before engaging in such things, in fact for everything in life for the Jew, he needs to first check with his Rabbis.
I am not going to bore with the details of every stupid rule they have such as, you are not allowed to ride a bike on a Saturday, because riding a bike is like riding a horse, and if you rode a horse you are tempted to whip, and if you intend to whip it, you might break a small branch or something which in turn is similar to harvest which is work, and work is forbidden on a Saturday!!! I kid you not!! These are their rules and religion!!
You might also want to read The Synagogue of Satan , Doc
This is longer than I intended, but really there is no shortage of information about the evils of the Talmud, please note that the Talmud is also connected to Witchcraft and Magic, and that there are other smaller books that some Rabbis follow and are related to such topics. The same way the Zohar is an extension of the Talmud, there are other books to extend it.
Some also believe tearing is prohibited on Saturday, so they'll pre-tear TP for shabbat.
You can probably write an entire volume on the ludicrous laws they have, the funniest ones are the ways they evade these law, makes you realize you are dealing with completely crazed people.
For example they are not allowed to milk cows, so someone just "pretends to place the bowl for no reason, another says I am going to relieve this cow pretending not to see the bowl and the third just goes and says, oh there's a bowl of milk! And he takes it.
And it goes on state level: Shmita year, where they pretend to sell the land of israel to goys for a year then buy it again later so they can farm on that year. Or others take the wine made from that year and only put it as offers....
It is absolutely painful to see those demented sub humans rule all over us, the saddest part, people refuse to see the sanhedrin (their ruling council). They keep imagining some obscure "elites" not seeing the obvious.
These are good examples of circuitous legislation to resolve conflicting culturally developed goals of law. The same is true of legislation worldwide. If we were to understand the cultural desires not to offend certain ancient principles, we could speak to them without ridicule. Jesus logically argued against similar practices by demonstrating that the law permits a simpler resolution considering the big picture, because he was the Torah embodied (the Word). We can only rescue people from impotent practices by understanding their concerns.
You again mention Sanhedrin but it has no existence in this day that I know of.
They still rule over you. Have you taken their Jewish poison injections?
I don't think it's doxing to say I'm "unvaccinated" in the new sense. I've said enough here about my sovereign American citizenship that I shouldn't be confused with someone allowing any other rule than Jesus's.
When you find a Christian who agrees with (that Jew) St. Paul on being a love-slave of (that Jew) Jesus and on doing everything he can to save some (of those Jews) by giving them knowledge of Jesus, you should've had enough Bible not to be surprised.
As another user notes, the first main paragraph is full of sweeping generalizations that do not support their point. To call "every real position of power" connected to Jews is to focus on one facet of a multifarious problem, satanism, that is equal-opportunity with respect to any peoples. To call Jews mostly Talmud-followers is to ignore that most Jews are irreligious, secular. To call the Talmud a "moral basis" is misleading at best because it's not taken as inspired but merely as a steppingstone in continuing organic tradition that grows with time. To say that the Talmud exposes parasite plans is also a fail because those plans come from satanism and are only infiltrated into the Talmud like they are infiltrated into the church fathers or any other religionists; the devil's plans are understood by understanding God's plan first so that the inserted counterfeits can be quickly spotted. So the conclusion, commending study of Talmud's greatest gaffes as if it gives a unique window into defeating the devil, is misguided at every step.
I won't repeat more contextualizations I put in parts 1 and 2.
The quote you cite about anal sex does not come from the Talmud but from the 12th-century Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 21: "A man may ... with his wife ... engage in vaginal or anal intercourse." The Torah and Talmud agree that anal intercourse with a man is forbidden, but I don't think either one directly answers the question as to women. I would have assumed the prohibition against gay anal sex would apply to women, but in the Christian Bible it appears God decided it sufficient not to get specific but to leave it as man's duty to procreate and woman's prerogative to have only consensual sex. And I've heard a Christian pastor imply anal sex was permitted in Christian marriage, though I disagree; but I can't argue that it's taught either way specifically in the Bible. So I don't think that our modern objection about the immaturity of a medieval ruling really does justice to understanding the religious context.
(1a) Shabbat 32b accurately says: "Anyone who is vigilant in ritual fringes merits two thousand eight hundred servants will serve him."
(2a) Not worth debating, the author rejects Jesus and Christianity because of rejecting both animal and (Jesus's) human sacrifice, which fails to understand the point of either. The Talmud does not permit human sacrifice to Moloch under any conditions. Judges 11 in the Christian Bible does speak of the giving up of Jephthah's daughter, but it is never said this is a human sacrifice so it probably was a temple dedication just like Samuel's a little later in the history. I believe the site is using a Muslim-based methodology and sourcing (Carol Valentine's "Come and Hear"), so it's pretty biased and is possibly one of those that pretends to be neutral but has all the hallmarks of Islam.
(2b) Well, I was right, you just went from the one hasty search result to its source, Come and Hear. I've dealt with this biased source before and it is linked to Islam, so please accept my testimony that it has no interest in logical conclusions. However, it does deal with the description of sacrifice to Moloch in Sanhedrin 64a ff. This is not a doctrine that children may be sacrificed, this is a discussion about when it can be proven the parent had sufficient intent for the sacrifice to be executed, and the answer was if the parent both consented verbally and participated in injuring the child. If a child was sacrificed without both these happening, the parent was not a guilty party. It only describes when the human court takes action, applying mercy by leaving lesser sins (partial or conflicted action) for God to judge. So there is no permission for sacrifice, but there are instead paths by which conflicted actions can be ruled as being less than actual sacrifice.
(2c) There is no reason to demean an anonymous Oprah guest describing satanic ritual abuse attributed back to 1700. If the entire story is taken at face value, it simply illustrates what is now more commonly known about satanic ritual, and what has always been hinted about it. The fact that it's happened in some Jewish families is more likely to indicate that it's happened in families of all religions than that it's happened in all Jewish families. No reference to Talmud either.
(3a) Does not prove what you summarized; it shows teachings that, generically, the charity of Gentiles is not to be taken as sincere and should not typically be accepted. Well, at times when there is no guarantee Gentiles have any moral code, this would make sense; and at other times, it is a minimum that can be built upon. There is no prohibition in the text, just a deprecation.
(3b) Well, I appreciate this source (Stormfront's Hoffman and Critchley), because it supplies data that others have quoted anonymously that I hadn't successfully tracked. But it's pretty well all editorialized rather than understood. The quote you refer to is from "Mishneh Torah, Foreign Worship and Customs of the Nations 10": "Idolaters .... It is forbidden to have mercy upon them, as Deut. 7:2 states: 'Do not be gracious to them.' Accordingly, if we see an idolater being swept away or drowning in the river, we should not help him. If we see that his life is in danger, we should not save him." Since this refers to Deut. 7:2, it only includes true idolators (the seven pagan nations), and further it only refers (by using the drowning example) to heroic measures that might endanger one's own life. There is no teaching that it's always a sin to help Gentiles.
(3c) Since the applicable section just refers to TalmudUnmasked.com chapter 15, I'll just refer to my page with reference to Avodah Zarah 26a-b; Shulchan Arukh, Choshen Mishpat 388; Sanhedrin 59a; Mishneh Torah, Foreign Worship and Customs of the Nations 10 (again); Shulchan Arukh, Yoreh De'ah 158. I have not given full rebuttals to the others (yet), but the ones from which you took your primary points are addressed there, and most of the others are post-Talmudic individual opinions anyway.
(3d) Again, this is another scattershot source, but a good one to know in case I ever intend to have these better organized. The quotes that relate to your main points are already addressed here or on the link page.
I'll need to take a break here and return to the remainder later.
(4a) This is not about sexuality as OP might suggest alone, but more about review of how the Jew and the Gentile are different. When we remember that the person who proclaims the true God is considered to have joined the Jew, and the person who rejects the true God is considered to have left the Jews, regardless of birth race, it becomes clearer that only those under God's protection are those with all the blessings of being human. This context is often ignored in discussing the distinction.
(4b) See my comments on Sanhedrin 54b-55a; Sanhedrin 55b; Ketubot 11b (also covering Sanhedrin 69b); Avodah Zarah 36b-37a. I have not looked into Sotah 26b before; but it simply says that bestiality is not a category of adultery, not that bestiality is legitimate.
(4c) Much repeated from the same author. See my comments on Yevamot 59b; Ketubot 11b as to Sanhedrin 69b again; Sanhedrin 55b; Yevamot 57b; Yevamot 60b; Niddah 44b. I didn't get Yevamot 55b before; on first glance this appears to be another categorization issue, namely that necrophilia does not count as adultery. Necrophilia is instead punishable as contact with a corpse, which renders impurity, but it was not considered a capital crime like adultery. Your specific reference to marrying a woman who had intercourse with an animal is Yevamot 59b, and, as I pointed out, this was a provision of mercy for a specific young girl of Hitlu who had been attacked sexually by a dog. Thereby it was presumed that such an act was unintentional as a default view, but if there was evidence it was intentional it would be punished as bestiality and not cleared to the priesthood.
In short, your concerns about apparent immorality are generally echoes of the objections of others who did not understand the Talmudic context and who did not read it like a specialized wiki directory where relevant information is not nearby or readily found without memorization. When one is responsible for any massive law code, one generally must know where to find things even though they are vastly separated, or else one will be confused by the missing context; this is absolutely true of the US Code. Most sentences that seem to allow immorality when taken alone are actually about dealing with collateral issues of the immorality, which has been dealt with more summarily in a different passage. There are a few oddities that are not mentioned anywhere in the Bible, such as marital anal sex and necrophilia, and the Talmud follows this by not ruling out of hand that these things are necessarily punishable in themselves, but that they are to be judged by analogy instead; and the Christians make the same type of judgment about such matters outside the specific explicit text.
You conclude with another reference to the obfuscation of Sabbath law, with mention of superstition in the Talmud, and with mention of the Zohar, which is a late book teaching a specific mystical mindset among some Jews. Each of these can be given their own criticism generically as you point out. These things being worthy of some criticism, such as things explicitly in the Talmud that I've alluded to, does not mean that we get to lump everything together as evil or to misquote or to judge beyond what is written. Each teaching must be taken on its own and its context realized. The conclusion would be that the Talmud has many things that are culturally challenging, and some that indicate bias or incompletion in development of morals, but nothing that demonstrates that the religion itself is guilty of teaching evil. Rather, the religion is to be judged, in each person who upholds it, by whether that person knows God and submits to his true Messianic plan (now revealed in Jesus). The Talmud will not tell us the state of any man's soul. Thank you for permitting my review.
Have you ever met a Jewish person? I can see from your multitude of posts on this topic that you're very enthusiastic about it, but so much of this information is just blatantly wrong.
How do you expect people to take your argument seriously when you make blatantly false statements like this? You really don't know what you're talking about.
points straight at the most truthful part
says it's wrong but can't say why
Because the truth hurts.
Huh? I clearly explained why it was false.
Is Biden Jewish? No, but for a start he doesn't really have any power, secondly he is completely cucked to the Jews. I made this minor correction into: "Basically every -real- position of power is held -either- by Jews or -people strongly connected to them-" for those who want to be real picky and not see the obvious.
The above statement is very factual, if you still haven't figured that one out, you just need to start looking up the names and connection, Trump is a Chabad Lubavitch boy so is Kushner, All of Biden's children are married to Jews, and he is nothing more than Shabbas goy, Putin is Chabad, Mao was funded by Jews, Hollywood is Jewish, the whole world is dominated by Jews, Jews did September 11th (Netanyahu and Silverstein amongst others), Epistein and Maxwell were Jewsih Mossad and on and on.
Everything I have mentioned is factual.
Your argument is all over the place. I'm not going to get into some conversation with you about Jewish people "running the world" or whatever because it's actually just too boring, I'm just saying that your interpretation of the Talmud and the claims you're making about it are based on complete ignorance and a misinterpretation of the facts.
I am curious, what do you think of Shahak's work? Have you read some of his books?
I have. Shahak is an interesting guy and as a public intellectual waging taboo warfare against a fundamentalist religious body, I highly respect his work. Unfortunately, he undermined some of his best writing with truly bizarre falsehoods and fabrications. I'm not sure what his motive was with regards to that stuff.
Thank you for replying and always commenting in a civil manner.
But if I may ask, what in particular in his books do you think is falsehood and fabrication?
Yeah, all good. I don't hate you, I just think you're wrong about some things.
I think Shahak was so fed up by the end that he was putting things in his books just to troll the establishment in Israel. His major work about Orthodox Jews refusing to save non-Jewish lives on the Sabbath is false, as something like 70% of the EMTs in Israel are Orthodox and they do indeed work on the Sabbath regardless of the religious background of the person who calls for them. He also writes things about Orthodox ritual hand-washing before and after meals, "once for God and once for Satan" which is completely false. Some other weird little details like that without footnote verification, just figments of his imagination.
I have absolutely no love in my heart for Orthodox Jews (or any religious fundamentalists, for that matter) but his falsehoods about them diminish his legitimate attempts to establish a radical liberalism and political restructuring in Israel.