Saturn, Satan/Lucifer aka the Baal Principality ( fallen demon god of 1,000 faces) is real, and witchcraft is also real. You can find the proof in the Bible.
there shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch. Deuteronomy 18:10
The Babylonian Mystery Schools that rule over this realm are not retards, they use Black Magick to get power from Satan/Lucifer who literally is the wicked prince of this world!
Oh aye. So you don't think Lucifer is fake? Honestly I've seen no evidence that there is some Lucifer character directing anyone.
Satan is just one out of thousands of names for Saturn/Baal/Moloch/Ninurta/Nimrod/Gilgamesh/Marduk/Osiris
More like the cults are basically just sex obsessed weirdos that will justify whatever they have to to get paid, laid or off their tits on drugs or adrenochrome.
Saturn's chosen people are devil worshiping, power tripping psychos that are practicing black magick since antediluvian times.
It's ones consent to any suggestion of another which makes one a traitor/trader. Consent enables another while disabling self...that's magic/magh - "to be able".
so called magic being used is just twisting of words, distractions and cons
It's answering (consent) the call (suggestion) which represents magic. Holding onto words enables another to twist. Ignoring perceivable enables another to distract by suggestion. Enabling a chosen one defrauds (cons) ones choice.
major problems are down to money
Nature implies major solution; being implies minor problem...solution (value) generates problem (evaluation) in motion; money affixes a currency to distract evaluation from current value.
the worship of money
Nature implies the worth; each being within implies a ship aka a vessel (life) within motion (inception towards death)...money tempts the vessel to hold onto artificial worth, while ignoring that natural worth diminishes any vessel holding onto.
In simple...currency tempts one to hold onto; current cannot be held onto. A being doesn't need to attach value to nature; a being needs to evaluate the moving value of nature by adaptation.
whatever power they have isn't enough to change
Few wield the power of many called "consensus", which is enough to keep many distracted with one another. Joining a consensus by consenting to any suggestion tempts one to ignore all perceivable changes into each ones perception.
Mentally (ideals) and physically (idols) holding onto...drains ones power.
those that have amassed psychospiritual abilities
Those (jew) that have amassed (gentiles) are distracting from psycho (motion) > spiritual (momentum) > ability (matter).
Artificially luring many together (synthesis) distracts from nature moving each apart from one another (analysis)...a simple inversion.
the workings of God
a) God implies work...singularity. Few suggest pluralism (workings) to establish a consensus among many who ignore singularity.
b) Putting THE before GOD implies ones consent to suggested the-ism, which enables another to shape in the name of (in nomine) God.
One cannot serve two masters
a) ONEs consent to any suggestion of ONE another establishes dual-ism aka ones servitude to mastery of another one, while ignoring the one and only authority.
All (cause) implies more than each one (effect) within. The process of all dividing into each one implies a lessening aka loss (inception towards death) generating growth (life).
You cannot serve money and God.
God enables free will of choice. Suggested servitude tempts ones choice to select a chosen one as master.
God does not require servitude...God forces temptation (inception towards death) through resistance (life) which requires free will of choice for adaptation.
All perceivable sets each ones perception FREE. Any suggestion of another tempts ones consent to BIND itself to another. It's binding oneself by free will of choice which establishes another as master and self as slave.
Luciferian witches are literally worshiping Saturn aka Satan aka Azazel!
A good point of focus may be the planet Saturn, which holds two octaves[2] which is a lower and higher. The opposing force resides in both octaves, the lower being Satanas = rebellion, adversity, fire and the destructive power of the Sun. The lower is the demonic, being the fall from the light to taste the wisdom of darkness. The higher octave is Lucifer, the Angel-Serpent which brings wisdom to mankind. Lucifer is known in the Sabbat and Luciferian Witchcraft lore as among other names, Azal’ucel, being a sigillic word-manipulation of Azazel and Lucifer. The face of the Dragon-serpent is indeed an Angel (Angels are described as Higher articulations in man) who brings the gift of the Black Flame to us, Spirit and intelligence.
“It is the ecstasy of the in-between that led to the path unseen” -Azothoz by Michael W. Ford
In working with the Adversary, one must be focused on the Great Work of Becoming like Lucifer, thus keeping by Will developing in the Higher Octave, being the Luciferian Sabbat– the ecstasy of the Light of Iblis, the very Knowledge and Communication of the Holy Guardian Angel or Angelic Familiar. This is the essence of the Great Work, the bare root or essence of what the focus of BlackMagick and Luciferian Witchcraft/Sorcery entails.
A study of the Janus-Headed Adversary is essential in the context of the Sabbatic/Luciferian Path as well as others. In the Brotherhood of Saturn the God of the Saturnian Sphere is Baphomet – Temohpab, being a Angel-Demon of both a positive and negative side. In AZOTHOZ, Lucifer is the Baphometic Spirit which presents in lyrical prose the sides of the Adversary, in terms of Sethanic (of SET) Witchcraft and the Left Hand Path. Set is presented in AZOTHOZ as the Egyptian Godform of Chaos, Darkness and Storms. He is in this sigillic mask the initiator and tester, the opposer and flame giver. It is indeed the mask of Set which was given unto his bride, Lilith, to spawn CAIN, the first sorcerer and initiator of Witchblood.
The cabal = satanic jews.
Call them for what they really are and stop this nonsense.
Anyone using this term any more is most likely a jew trying to sow division.
What nonsense buddy? Modern day "jews" are Edomites aka Canaanites aka Cainites aka Kenites, they actually are the descendants of the Pharisees from the Synagogue of Satan!
“Edom is in modern Jewry.” —The Jewish Encyclopedia, 1925 edition, Vol.5, p.41
Thus dwelt Esau in mount Seir: Esau is Edom. ~Genesis 36:8
The satanic/luciferian cabal does not consist only of Edomite "jews" btw, there are plenty of white traitors (like your masonic pedo president) & crypto-"jews" who are part of it.
Thank you for admitting the names "satanist" or "luciferian" cover the whole group, and the other names only segment the group into various sets of human shields and hidden hands, which can be distracting from conquering the whole group.
You are actually satanic if you call so called "gentiles" (who are God's real chosen people) goyim aka "human cattle", your god really is Baphomet aka Ain Soph/Satan/Saturn and Shekinah/Lucifer combined.
Do you mean God's chosen people are selected from non-Jews instead of saying all non-Jews are chosen? Is it impossible for the chosen to be selected from ethnic Jews for some reason?
When Christians read the Bible, it refers to both Jews and Gentiles as goyim. For millennia it was just a common word for "nations".
Writings that speak of people as animals depend on context, Jesus referred to his followers as animals. But I'm trying to remember your view about Jesus.
Again, blurring names is unhelpful. Lucifer and satan are close enough that they can refer to the same entity (but they are also titles, praiser and adversary, that can apply to more than one). Baphomet and Saturn are fascinating side trails and I suppose nowadays they've been merged onto the main strand but sometimes distinctions appear. Ain Sof (Unlimited) is an attempt to name deity apophatically and so it's a title that isn't appropriate for the devil; my rule is not to give him more credit than he deserves. Shekinah (Dwelling) is a form of a Biblical word for God and similarly isn't fitting to glorify the devil with. When you throw names about inexactly, you tend to give more glory to the devil that you're claiming to fight, so the truth requires being exact.
Similarly, the 2800 servants is based on a promise that Christians claim as well, namely Zech. 8:23.
If you think Christians should not endorse parts of the Bible like the word "goy", animal metaphors, Wisdom, Infinity, Adversaries, Presence, Praisers, or many followers from all nations, then it'd be helpful to describe how we know who are God's real chosen and how we know what his real Word is.
Jesus referred to his followers as animals. But I'm trying to remember your view about Jesus.
Jesus actually referred to you babylonian Edomites and Canaanites as Synagogue of Satan.
He also told your lying psychopathic Pharisee ancestors that their father is the DEVIL!
You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
Similarly, the 2800 servants is based on a promise that Christians claim as well, namely Zech. 8:23.
It's not true at all STOP LYING, Christians will be hunted down, enslaved and DECAPITATED according to your SATANIC BABYLONIAN TALMUDIC NOAHIDE LAWS!
About the Christians:
It is the law to kill anyone who renounces the Torah and Christians belong to the detractors. from the Torah." (Cohen law 425, Comment 425, 5).
The Jews must always try to deceive the Christians." (Zohar 1,160 a).
The name of God is not profaned if a Jew deceives a Christian.
b, -Note: in other more extensive versions the correct translation would be: "It is allowed to deceive the Christians, the Jew can lie and perjure to condemn a Christian; the name of God is not profaned when lying to Christians.
A Jew who kills a Christian does not commit sin, but rather offers a sacrifice.
acceptable to God.” (Abhdah Zarah 26 b, Tosephoth).
The Virgin Mary is a prostitute. She, who was a descendant of princes and
governors, played the whore with the carpenters.” (Sanhedrin 106 a).
"Exterminating Christians is something necessary." (Zohar 11, 43 a)
Do not make agreements or show mercy to the Christians. (Hilkhpth Akum x, 1)
It is a mitzvah ('religious duty') to eradicate in any way traitorous Jews,
I will minimize the heretics, and lead them to descend into the pit of destruction, when they cause difficulty for the Jews and people wavering away from God, as it was towards Jesus Nazareth and his disciples, and Tzadok, Baithos, and their disciples. Torah, c. 10, p 184.
Those Jews who do good to Christians will never rise again when they die. (Zohar 1, 25 b)
You will be innocent of murder if you attempt to kill a Christian. (Makkoth, 7 b).
The Jews must destroy the books of the Christians, such as the New Testament.
(Shabbath 116 a–Note: Dr. Israel Shahak -Jew- from the Hebrew University, recounts how the Israelites burned hundreds of copies of the New Testament in the
Occupation of Palestine on March 23, 1980, in his book: 'Jewish History, Religion'
Judaica, page 21.
"Christian property belongs to the first Jew who claims it." (Babba Bathra 54 b)
Jesus is in hell and is being punished by being immersed in boiling semen.
Christians are immersed in boiling excrement." (Gittin 57 a - Note: other versions
From this verse it is translated like this: 'Jesus Christ boils in hot excrement.'
Christians and others who rejected the Talmud will go to hell and will be punished there. for all generations.” (Rosh Hashanah 17 a).
Sanhedrin 59a: "Murdering Goyim is like killing a wild animal."
Abodah Zara 26b: "Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed."
Sanhedrin 59a: "A goy (Gentile) who pries into The Law (Talmud) is guilty of death."
Libbre David 37: "To communicate anything to a Goy about our religious relations would be equal to the killing of all Jews, for if the Goyim knew what we teach about them, they would kill us openly."
Libbre David 37: "If a Jew be called upon to explain any part of the rabbinic books, he ought to give only a false explanation. Who ever will violate this order shall be put to death."
Yebhamoth 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age."
Schabouth Hag. 6d: "Jews may swear falsely by use of subterfuge wording."
Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Do not save Goyim in danger of death."
Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Show no mercy to the Goyim."
Choschen Hamm 388, 15: "If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth."
Choschen Hamm 266,1: "A Jew may keep anything he finds which belongs to the Akum (Gentile). For he who returns lost property (to Gentiles) sins against the Law by increasing the power of the transgressors of the Law. It is praiseworthy, however, to return lost property if it is done to honor the name of God, namely, if by so doing, Christians will praise the Jews and look upon them as honorable people."
Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Dia
13: "A Jew should and must make a false oath when the Goyim asks if our books contain anything against them."
Baba Necia 114, 6: "The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts."
Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D: "When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves."
Nidrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L: "Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night."
Aboda Sarah 37a: "A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."
Gad. Shas. 2:2: "A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl."
Tosefta. Aboda Zara B, 5: "If a goy kills a goy or a Jew, he is responsible; but if a Jew kills a goy, he is NOT responsible. "
Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 388: "It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere. It is permitted to kill him even before he denounces."
Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348: "All property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation, which, consequently, is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples."
Would you like the truth? Since you use boilerplates, I'll give you the truth I have to see if you want it.
Jesus actually referred to you babylonian Edomites and Canaanites as Synagogue of Satan. He also told your lying psychopathic Pharisee ancestors that their father is the DEVIL!
Thank you for assuming that I should suffer with these people. The synagogue of satan were not Jews but can be identified by the letters of Ignatius to Smyrna and Philadelphia as a group of wannabe Jews probably including a young Onkelos (who later converted). Babylon, Edom, and Canaan do not have continuing polity despite people being influenced by them. Many Pharisees were sympathetic to Jesus, like Hillel, Joseph, Nicodemus, Gamaliel, Paul, the righteous scribe, and many of the ten thousands of Torah-observant Messianic Jews in Acts 21:20.
It's not true at all STOP LYING, Christians will be hunted down, enslaved and DECAPITATED according to your SATANIC BABYLONIAN TALMUDIC NOAHIDE LAWS!
Of course Christians claim Zech. 8:23 just as Jews do, the interpretation is different though. But whatever the passage says it says to all the righteous. If laws are Noahide then by definition they are to be agreed by all children of Noah, Gentile and Jew both. In the Bible idolators are indeed guilty of capital sin, but the view of Judaism has not been that Christianity is idolatry (except for a very small number of nonrepresentative teachers like Ulla, 4th c.); rather, Christianity is a special case to be treated differently and tolerated for the sanctification of God's name. There is no authoritative Jewish source by which the distortion of Noahide law is drawn; rather it's all just wild inference. Obviously Noah is not Babylonian, nor Talmudic which is a wholly different law and jurisdiction.
You quote two crazed compilations that are mostly not from the Talmud and that are entirely misunderstandings of actual texts, so far from the written text as to be often incomprehensible. (For instance, the nonexistence of "Libbre David" was noted back in 1920.) The first contains a slight bit of material new to me so I will answer it separately. The second is just this graphic and is entirely answerable with facts and accurate quotes (see passages with reference [4]).
TLDR: If you want to criticize Jews or Talmud, do it right. When you misquote you create sympathy for Jews and can be accused of shilling for them. Criticize the superstition and legalism of the actual quotes, not the misquotes that don't represent actual teaching.
Innocent people suffer everyday in places like Gaza because your babylonian book permits the slaughter of innocent women and children through dehumanization.
The Synagogue of Satan is the cabal, all the elites and their secret societies are kabbalistic Baphomet worshipers.
There is no authoritative Jewish source by which the distortion of Noahide law is drawn; rather it's all just wild inference. Obviously Noah is not Babylonian, nor Talmudic which is a wholly different law and jurisdiction.
I never stated that Noah is babylonian, but you can find the noahide laws only in the Babylonian Talmud which is Anti-Christian.
Also the Noahide Laws began when President Jimmy Carter signed Education Day USA into Law in 1978!
but the view of Judaism has not been that Christianity is idolatry (except for a very small number of nonrepresentative teachers like Ulla
We see the tribulation saints being martyred quite early in the 7 years of the Daniel 70th week prophecy in Revelation 6:9-11 and Revelation 7:9-17
Now contrast Noahide Law #1 with the nascent Sanhedrin's views about our Lord Jesus Christ. “The nascent Sanhedrin, a modern attempt to revive the ancient Jewish court, views Jesus Christ as a FALSE PROPHET who challenged Jewish authority and teachings.”
“This is primarily based on the traditional Jewish understanding of Jesus as someone who did not fulfill the criteria for the Messiah as outlined in the Hebrew scriptures; therefore, they reject his divinity and messianic claims.”
Non-compliance for Christians is quite clear…
“With but a few exceptions, the punishment meted out to a Noachid for the transgression of ANY of the 7 laws is DECAPITATION.”
Matthew 10:39 "He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it."
Of course Christians claim Zech. 8:23
Ancient Israelites = /= modern day "jews"
Christian Zionists probably claim that because their Rothschild funded Scofield bible says so.
No real Christian wants to be a slave of the Synagogue of Satan, and the Bible doesn't explicitly state that you will have 2800 "subhuman" slaves when your nachash moshiach (antichrist) comes!
TLDR: If you want to criticize Jews or Talmud, do it right. When you misquote you create sympathy for Jews and can be accused of shilling for them. Criticize the superstition and legalism of the actual quotes, not the misquotes that don't represent actual teaching.
Onkelos then went and raised Jesus the Nazarene from the grave through necromancy… What is the punishment of that man, a euphemism for Jesus himself, in the next world? Jesus said to him: He is punished with boiling excrement.
The Sabbatean's "sympathy" victim card is long expired, and they will never be redeemed through their sins.
Thank you for supplying a new source! It still follows the same erratic misquotation methods as others but it's helpful to see them all. I'm adding details to the Talmud Quotes page.
Probably means Shulchan Arukh, Choshen Mishpat 425:5, which says: "In the case of a Jewish heretic, which is someone who worships idols or sins in spite- ... and those who deny the Torah or Jewish prophecy, there is a mitzvah to remove them." There is no "Cohen Law" text but it's one of the funniest misnames! "Idols" is literally Akum, meaning "star and constellation worshipper". There is no ruling that Christians are Akum, but there are rulings that they are a special case.
Zohar, Vayetzei 27 (at 280, also called Zohar 1:160a) does not say "The Jews must always try to deceive the Christians." Google translates it as: "With tricks you will make war for yourself." But this is just an inference from Pr. 24:6 (KJV), "By wise counsel thou shalt make thy war." Zohar is a medieval source, again it is limited to use in wartime.
Tosafot on Avodah Zarah 26b comes close to saying "Even the best of the goyim should all be killed." The medieval Hebrew text quotes Tractate Soferim 15 by name, where the actual text is discussed, without significant elaboration here: במסכת סופרים [פט"ו] כשר שבכנענים הרוג ... דהיינו בשעת מלחמה or "In Tractate Soferim [15], the best of the Canaanites are to be killed ..., that is, in time of war." It's quite clear that the context changes the quote: in wartime it is understood that it is permitted to kill even the best among the enemies. But this is only one rabbi's proverb, not a halakhic majority ruling, nor from the main Talmud (not found in Avodah Zarah 26b).
Bava Kamma 113a does not say "It is allowed to deceive the Christians." Actual text: "Rav Ashi said: With regard to a Gentile customs collector .... one approaches circuitously; the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiba says: One does not approach circuitously due to the sanctification of God's name." Two contradictory views are stated, then the ruling is given that Akiba is correct even if the Name is not in consideration due to Lev. 25:48 prohibiting robbing a Gentile, as quoted in Sanhedrin 57a. So this paraphrase is almost accurate for the view of the minority of Ashi and Yishmael, but not for the majority view or Jewish practice.
Part of this same quote comes from Rockwell's White Power attributed to Baba Kamma 113b, which accurately says, "Permitted his lost item, as Rav Hama bar Gurya says Rav says: From where permitted the lost item of a Gentile? As it is stated, With every lost thing of your brother's, to your brother you return, but you do not return to a Gentile. But say this applies where has not yet come into hand, as he is not obligated to pursue it. But where the item had come into his hand, say return it. Ravina said: 'And you have found' indicates that come into one's hand. Is taught Rabbi Pinehas ben Ya'ir says: In a case where there is desecration of name, prohibited even lost item." Thus the minority opinion is stated in order to be rejected. The lost item of a Gentile that is picked up must be returned if possible, and even if not picked up it should be returned for sanctification of the Name.
Bamidbar Rabbah 21 [not Talmud] does not say "A Jew who kills a Christian does not commit sin, but rather offers a sacrifice acceptable to God." It actually says, with reference to the death of Zimri (Israelite) and Cozbi (Midianite), Num. 25:13: "When anyone sheds the blood of the wicked, it is as if he had offered a sacrifice." So "wicked" is not a code for a Gentile, and Numbers itself compares such a death to an atonement.
Sanhedrin 106a accurately says, "Rav Pappa says this that people say: Was from princes and rulers, was licentious with carpenters." This is merely a proverb, applied to Balaam, which may also indicate contemporary mood about Jesus (already known from the Gospels), and is not directly about Mary or Jesus, nor an actual ruling.
Zohar, Bo 16 does not say "Christian extinction is a necessary sacrifice." This is attributed to the entire book "Zohar, Shemot" without paragraph citation, but this is the closest match in hand (aka Zohar 2:230 or 2:43a or 11:43a), given by Pranaitis in exaggerated form. The text (ויקרא כ' ע"א) (שמות י״ג:י״ג) וְכָל פֶּטֶר חֲמוֹר תִּפְדֶּה בְשֶׂה וְגוֹ' .... וְאִם לֹא תִפְדֶּה וַעֲרַפְתּוֹ .... לְאִתְמָחֲאָה מִן סֵפֶר חַיִּים, דְּעָלַיְיהוּ אִתְּמַר, (שמות ל״ב:ל״ג) מִי אֲשֶׁר חָטָא לִי אֶמְחֶנּוּ מִסִּפְרִי can be translated: "[Lev. 20:1, Ex. 13:13] And every donkey's firstborn shall be redeemed with a lamb, etc. .... And if it is not redeemed, you shall kill it .... To be blotted out of the book of life, so he said of them [Ex. 32:33], he who has sinned against me will be removed from my account." However, this is very basic Scriptural exegesis. If this were to be applied to a Gentile as Pranaitis hints, Torah context would be that the human must be redeemed with a lamb and could not be killed. This is not Talmud or command or halakhah; by the time the Zohar surfaced, disdain for Christianity was already present, but there is no genocidal text.
Mishneh Torah, Foreign Worship and Customs of the Nations 10, 12th century, which can be adventurously spelled as "Hilkkoth Akum" 10:1 (rulings of worshippers of stars and constellations), does not say "Do not save goyim in danger of death .... Show no mercy to the goyim." It says: "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." This is not Talmud, is not about goyim but is limited to idolaters (with Jewish idolaters being mentioned separately), and refers only if one's own life would be at risk. Deut. 7:2 is limited to the seven nations in Canaan judged for their idolatry, who were in a state of war with Israel and were not to be shown mercy, so Maimonides extends this to other hypothetical known idolaters.
Mishneh Torah, Foreign Worship and Customs of the Nations 10 is also adventurously called the otherwise inscrutable "Torah c. 10". The standard text correctly reads "To whom do the above apply? To Gentiles. It is a mitzvah, however, to eradicate Jewish traitors, minim, and Epicureans, and to cause them to descend to the pit of destruction, since they cause difficulty to the Jews and sway the people away from God." (Not "minimize".) This is the actual view of Maimonides, and refers to diverters, sectarians, and Epicureans, but only from the Jews, as Gentiles were outside this jurisdiction. Now, a variant censored reading exists, but it cannot be held to be the considered opinion of Maimonides or the conclusion of Judaism (as defined by the standard text): "As Jesus of Nazareth and his students, and Zadok, Boethus, and their students". Since it's Jews only, this doesn't refer to Christians at large but to marranos, whom other Jews treated singularly. The actual relationship between the unit "Jesus and students" and minim is not stated, but it's clear that whoever wrote it considered marranos at large to include some who diverted Israel. But the formal opinion of Maimonides is that the definition of "min" applied to separation from the community and commands (which marranos did but many Messianics today do not), and that the mitzvah involved is only about self-defense. Specifically, one is not to pity an attacker (Deut. 25:12) or stand idle (Lev. 19:16), but warns the attacker and prevents an attack on another's life, preferably nonlethally. So it's not about killing other than in an immediate attack, and cannot apply to sect without a judgment that the sect strikes at the heart of Jewish community, and even then only applies to eradicating the perceived threat of blood (which in this case should always be doable nonlethally as Deut. 25:12 hints). The part about the pit is not a mitzvah but an inference from Ps. 55:23, assuming the attacker is in fact wicked. All this comes from Maimonides, the book of mitzvoth, explaining the exact mitzvah, so in the quote he is simply drawing an application to marranos as to removing any life threat they pose. Since his views often moderated at different times, he must be taken as a whole, but it's granted that this passage found in nonstandard copies of his book does reflect his times and is challenging for modern Jews to deal with.
Zohar, Bereshit 20:228, found in Rohling 1883 (footnote 82) as "Sohar I. 25 b", does not say "Jene, welche sich bestreben, den Akum Gutes zu thun, ihre Seelen werden nicht auferstehen" (Google translate, "Those who strive to do good to the star and constellation worshipper, their souls will not rise"). It says "These were Uzza and Azael; from them the 'mixed multitude' derive their souls, and therefore they also are called nefilim, because they fall into fornication with fair women. For this, God casts them out from the future world, in which they have no portion, and gives them their reward in this world." This is about specific Nephilim, spirit beings, not about Jews. Rohling ignorantly interprets the Gen. 6 conversation of the sons of God and daughters of men as if it refers to any Jew doing any good to any Gentile, which is totally unrelated.
Makkot 7b:4 does not say "You will be innocent of murder if you attempt to kill a Christian" and isn't about Christians at all. It's an extended discussion on manslaughter (unintentional). 3-4 says, "The Sages taught: Unintentionally, exclude the intentionally .... Intentionally? Obvious, he is subject to death. Rather, Rava said: Say, exclude the says 'It is permitted'. Abaye said to, If says 'It is permitted', he a victim of circumstances beyond his control." This cites Num. 35:11, and the context that murder (intentional) is capital and manslaughter (unintentional) is to be exiled. The argument is that the word "unawares" in Numbers creates a third category, and this is then defined as the person who is too incompetent to be tried, who can't learn the obvious about the law because he justifies himself contrary to it. (While this category can be and has been abused, the fact that it should exist is not in question.)
Shabbat 116a does not say "Jews must destroy the books of the Christians." This is an extended hypothetical about what books are worth breaking Sabbath law for if they are on fire. The general rule is 115a: "All sacred writings, one may rescue them from the fire." Actual text: "The blank folios and the scrolls of heretics, one does not rescue them from the fire .... And just as they are not rescued from the fire, neither are they rescued from a rockslide, nor from water, nor from matter that destroys them." Though one rabbi recommends respect for the holy Name in heretical books, meaning saving the text is permitted, the clear majority ruling is that due to heresy God even lets his Name be effaced. Though there is animus against the New Testament, there is no active destruction in mind, merely rescue of heretical books from disaster by natural "matter".
Bava Batra 54b (Talmud 4:3:54b) accurately says: "Rav Yehuda says Shmuel says: Property of a Gentile, it is like a desert; anyone who takes possession of it acquired it. What is the reason? Gentile relinquishes from when money reaches his hand, Jew does not acquire until the deed reaches his hand." In immediate context, this is not referring to all property of Gentiles, but to that which is being sold to a Jew. The distinction is that between payment and any delay in the receipt of the deed, it is possible that another Jew might claim squatter or other rights, and that would need adjudication. This has nothing to do with the world being ownerless.
Gittin 56b-57a has been misquoted repeatedly and variously. Actual quote: "Onkelos ... went and raised Jesus [the Nazarene?] from the grave through necromancy .... Said to him: What is the punishment of that man? Said to him: with boiling excrement." It appears "Nazarene" has been added; "Yeshu" is apparently a conflation of Jesus, and the student of ben Perahya, and the son of Paphos ben Judah, and others. Other observations about the hesitant theology and the rashly joking context appear in a previous study. The nine interpretative cautions there apply throughout this list.
Rosh Hashanah 17a accurately says, "But the heretics; ... and the apostates; who denied the Torah; ... and separated from the ways of community ... descend to Gehenna and are judged there for generations and generations." This appeals to Is. 66:24 and makes it literally "for eons of eons." Heretics, minim, means separatists (e.g. tritheists, not specifically Christians); apostates means Epicureans (hedonists); next are deniers of Torah (not Talmud); then those without community (assembly). Other categories appear also. Flatly, Talmud contains no judgment that followers of Jesus as Messiah are minim, nor is this about rejection of Talmud.
What the fuck are you even talking about buddy?
Go ask the kabbalistic pedo traitors in power that practice black magick, and sacrifice children to Baal/Saturn/Satan.
What exactly do you know about secret societies like the Fraternitas Saturni?
Saturn, Satan/Lucifer aka the Baal Principality ( fallen demon god of 1,000 faces) is real, and witchcraft is also real. You can find the proof in the Bible.
The Babylonian Mystery Schools that rule over this realm are not retards, they use Black Magick to get power from Satan/Lucifer who literally is the wicked prince of this world!
Satan is just one out of thousands of names for Saturn/Baal/Moloch/Ninurta/Nimrod/Gilgamesh/Marduk/Osiris
Saturn's chosen people are devil worshiping, power tripping psychos that are practicing black magick since antediluvian times.
It's ones consent to any suggestion of another which makes one a traitor/trader. Consent enables another while disabling self...that's magic/magh - "to be able".
It's answering (consent) the call (suggestion) which represents magic. Holding onto words enables another to twist. Ignoring perceivable enables another to distract by suggestion. Enabling a chosen one defrauds (cons) ones choice.
Nature implies major solution; being implies minor problem...solution (value) generates problem (evaluation) in motion; money affixes a currency to distract evaluation from current value.
Nature implies the worth; each being within implies a ship aka a vessel (life) within motion (inception towards death)...money tempts the vessel to hold onto artificial worth, while ignoring that natural worth diminishes any vessel holding onto.
In simple...currency tempts one to hold onto; current cannot be held onto. A being doesn't need to attach value to nature; a being needs to evaluate the moving value of nature by adaptation.
Few wield the power of many called "consensus", which is enough to keep many distracted with one another. Joining a consensus by consenting to any suggestion tempts one to ignore all perceivable changes into each ones perception.
Mentally (ideals) and physically (idols) holding onto...drains ones power.
Those (jew) that have amassed (gentiles) are distracting from psycho (motion) > spiritual (momentum) > ability (matter).
Artificially luring many together (synthesis) distracts from nature moving each apart from one another (analysis)...a simple inversion.
a) God implies work...singularity. Few suggest pluralism (workings) to establish a consensus among many who ignore singularity.
b) Putting THE before GOD implies ones consent to suggested the-ism, which enables another to shape in the name of (in nomine) God.
a) ONEs consent to any suggestion of ONE another establishes dual-ism aka ones servitude to mastery of another one, while ignoring the one and only authority.
b) Master/magis - "more"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/master
All (cause) implies more than each one (effect) within. The process of all dividing into each one implies a lessening aka loss (inception towards death) generating growth (life).
God enables free will of choice. Suggested servitude tempts ones choice to select a chosen one as master.
God does not require servitude...God forces temptation (inception towards death) through resistance (life) which requires free will of choice for adaptation.
All perceivable sets each ones perception FREE. Any suggestion of another tempts ones consent to BIND itself to another. It's binding oneself by free will of choice which establishes another as master and self as slave.
The Fraternitas Saturni: History, Doctrine, and Rituals of the Magical Order of the Brotherhood of Saturn - Stephen E. Flowers, Ph.D. https://archive.org/details/stephen-e-flowers-the-fraternitas-saturni-history-doctrine-and-1/mode/1up
The Secret of Fire and Ice: A Historical Supplement to the Text (1995) by Michael Aquino https://pdfcoffee.com/the-secret-of-fire-and-ice-the-supplement-to-the-text-1995-by-michael-aquino-pdf-free.html
The Saturn Death Cult: The link between planetary catastrophes, ancient mythology and occult ritual - Troy D. McLachlan https://www.scribd.com/document/831853676/1-4929420195677602796
Saturn Symbolism - Occult and Satanic Symbolism 101 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RLvqgCXASY
Luciferian witches are literally worshiping Saturn aka Satan aka Azazel!
The cabal = satanic jews. Call them for what they really are and stop this nonsense. Anyone using this term any more is most likely a jew trying to sow division.
What nonsense buddy? Modern day "jews" are Edomites aka Canaanites aka Cainites aka Kenites, they actually are the descendants of the Pharisees from the Synagogue of Satan!
https://theserapeum.com/the-nephilim-tribes-of-canaanites-edomites-amalekites-jews/
The satanic/luciferian cabal does not consist only of Edomite "jews" btw, there are plenty of white traitors (like your masonic pedo president) & crypto-"jews" who are part of it.
False encyclopedia quote, hoax #6.
Thank you for admitting the names "satanist" or "luciferian" cover the whole group, and the other names only segment the group into various sets of human shields and hidden hands, which can be distracting from conquering the whole group.
You are actually satanic if you call so called "gentiles" (who are God's real chosen people) goyim aka "human cattle", your god really is Baphomet aka Ain Soph/Satan/Saturn and Shekinah/Lucifer combined.
Only babylonian talmudic racist psychos want to have 2800 subhuman goyim slaves in the end times! https://www.bitchute.com/video/4BJRPrNVfqEl
Do you mean God's chosen people are selected from non-Jews instead of saying all non-Jews are chosen? Is it impossible for the chosen to be selected from ethnic Jews for some reason?
When Christians read the Bible, it refers to both Jews and Gentiles as goyim. For millennia it was just a common word for "nations".
Writings that speak of people as animals depend on context, Jesus referred to his followers as animals. But I'm trying to remember your view about Jesus.
Again, blurring names is unhelpful. Lucifer and satan are close enough that they can refer to the same entity (but they are also titles, praiser and adversary, that can apply to more than one). Baphomet and Saturn are fascinating side trails and I suppose nowadays they've been merged onto the main strand but sometimes distinctions appear. Ain Sof (Unlimited) is an attempt to name deity apophatically and so it's a title that isn't appropriate for the devil; my rule is not to give him more credit than he deserves. Shekinah (Dwelling) is a form of a Biblical word for God and similarly isn't fitting to glorify the devil with. When you throw names about inexactly, you tend to give more glory to the devil that you're claiming to fight, so the truth requires being exact.
Similarly, the 2800 servants is based on a promise that Christians claim as well, namely Zech. 8:23.
If you think Christians should not endorse parts of the Bible like the word "goy", animal metaphors, Wisdom, Infinity, Adversaries, Presence, Praisers, or many followers from all nations, then it'd be helpful to describe how we know who are God's real chosen and how we know what his real Word is.
Jesus actually referred to you babylonian Edomites and Canaanites as Synagogue of Satan.
He also told your lying psychopathic Pharisee ancestors that their father is the DEVIL!
It's not true at all STOP LYING, Christians will be hunted down, enslaved and DECAPITATED according to your SATANIC BABYLONIAN TALMUDIC NOAHIDE LAWS!
Would you like the truth? Since you use boilerplates, I'll give you the truth I have to see if you want it.
Thank you for assuming that I should suffer with these people. The synagogue of satan were not Jews but can be identified by the letters of Ignatius to Smyrna and Philadelphia as a group of wannabe Jews probably including a young Onkelos (who later converted). Babylon, Edom, and Canaan do not have continuing polity despite people being influenced by them. Many Pharisees were sympathetic to Jesus, like Hillel, Joseph, Nicodemus, Gamaliel, Paul, the righteous scribe, and many of the ten thousands of Torah-observant Messianic Jews in Acts 21:20.
Of course Christians claim Zech. 8:23 just as Jews do, the interpretation is different though. But whatever the passage says it says to all the righteous. If laws are Noahide then by definition they are to be agreed by all children of Noah, Gentile and Jew both. In the Bible idolators are indeed guilty of capital sin, but the view of Judaism has not been that Christianity is idolatry (except for a very small number of nonrepresentative teachers like Ulla, 4th c.); rather, Christianity is a special case to be treated differently and tolerated for the sanctification of God's name. There is no authoritative Jewish source by which the distortion of Noahide law is drawn; rather it's all just wild inference. Obviously Noah is not Babylonian, nor Talmudic which is a wholly different law and jurisdiction.
You quote two crazed compilations that are mostly not from the Talmud and that are entirely misunderstandings of actual texts, so far from the written text as to be often incomprehensible. (For instance, the nonexistence of "Libbre David" was noted back in 1920.) The first contains a slight bit of material new to me so I will answer it separately. The second is just this graphic and is entirely answerable with facts and accurate quotes (see passages with reference [4]).
TLDR: If you want to criticize Jews or Talmud, do it right. When you misquote you create sympathy for Jews and can be accused of shilling for them. Criticize the superstition and legalism of the actual quotes, not the misquotes that don't represent actual teaching.
Innocent people suffer everyday in places like Gaza because your babylonian book permits the slaughter of innocent women and children through dehumanization.
The Synagogue of Satan is the cabal, all the elites and their secret societies are kabbalistic Baphomet worshipers.
Take a good look at your masonic Rothschild funded supreme court building and tell me it's not satanic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f0LV-m25oo
I never stated that Noah is babylonian, but you can find the noahide laws only in the Babylonian Talmud which is Anti-Christian.
Also the Noahide Laws began when President Jimmy Carter signed Education Day USA into Law in 1978!
"What's the punishment if a Gentile transgresses the Noahide Laws? DEATH!!!" - Rabbi https://www.bitchute.com/video/IaCnyGxLDkhV
Ancient Israelites = /= modern day "jews"
Christian Zionists probably claim that because their Rothschild funded Scofield bible says so.
No real Christian wants to be a slave of the Synagogue of Satan, and the Bible doesn't explicitly state that you will have 2800 "subhuman" slaves when your nachash moshiach (antichrist) comes!
Please show me where i misqouted Gittin 57a:3-4 https://worldeventsandthebible.com/talmud-jesus
The Sabbatean's "sympathy" victim card is long expired, and they will never be redeemed through their sins.
https://x.com/LetsGoBrando45/status/1975005363016720668
Thank you for supplying a new source! It still follows the same erratic misquotation methods as others but it's helpful to see them all. I'm adding details to the Talmud Quotes page.
"About the Christians":
Probably means Shulchan Arukh, Choshen Mishpat 425:5, which says: "In the case of a Jewish heretic, which is someone who worships idols or sins in spite- ... and those who deny the Torah or Jewish prophecy, there is a mitzvah to remove them." There is no "Cohen Law" text but it's one of the funniest misnames! "Idols" is literally Akum, meaning "star and constellation worshipper". There is no ruling that Christians are Akum, but there are rulings that they are a special case.
Zohar, Vayetzei 27 (at 280, also called Zohar 1:160a) does not say "The Jews must always try to deceive the Christians." Google translates it as: "With tricks you will make war for yourself." But this is just an inference from Pr. 24:6 (KJV), "By wise counsel thou shalt make thy war." Zohar is a medieval source, again it is limited to use in wartime.
Tosafot on Avodah Zarah 26b comes close to saying "Even the best of the goyim should all be killed." The medieval Hebrew text quotes Tractate Soferim 15 by name, where the actual text is discussed, without significant elaboration here: במסכת סופרים [פט"ו] כשר שבכנענים הרוג ... דהיינו בשעת מלחמה or "In Tractate Soferim [15], the best of the Canaanites are to be killed ..., that is, in time of war." It's quite clear that the context changes the quote: in wartime it is understood that it is permitted to kill even the best among the enemies. But this is only one rabbi's proverb, not a halakhic majority ruling, nor from the main Talmud (not found in Avodah Zarah 26b).
Bava Kamma 113a does not say "It is allowed to deceive the Christians." Actual text: "Rav Ashi said: With regard to a Gentile customs collector .... one approaches circuitously; the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiba says: One does not approach circuitously due to the sanctification of God's name." Two contradictory views are stated, then the ruling is given that Akiba is correct even if the Name is not in consideration due to Lev. 25:48 prohibiting robbing a Gentile, as quoted in Sanhedrin 57a. So this paraphrase is almost accurate for the view of the minority of Ashi and Yishmael, but not for the majority view or Jewish practice.
Part of this same quote comes from Rockwell's White Power attributed to Baba Kamma 113b, which accurately says, "Permitted his lost item, as Rav Hama bar Gurya says Rav says: From where permitted the lost item of a Gentile? As it is stated, With every lost thing of your brother's, to your brother you return, but you do not return to a Gentile. But say this applies where has not yet come into hand, as he is not obligated to pursue it. But where the item had come into his hand, say return it. Ravina said: 'And you have found' indicates that come into one's hand. Is taught Rabbi Pinehas ben Ya'ir says: In a case where there is desecration of name, prohibited even lost item." Thus the minority opinion is stated in order to be rejected. The lost item of a Gentile that is picked up must be returned if possible, and even if not picked up it should be returned for sanctification of the Name.
Bamidbar Rabbah 21 [not Talmud] does not say "A Jew who kills a Christian does not commit sin, but rather offers a sacrifice acceptable to God." It actually says, with reference to the death of Zimri (Israelite) and Cozbi (Midianite), Num. 25:13: "When anyone sheds the blood of the wicked, it is as if he had offered a sacrifice." So "wicked" is not a code for a Gentile, and Numbers itself compares such a death to an atonement.
Sanhedrin 106a accurately says, "Rav Pappa says this that people say: Was from princes and rulers, was licentious with carpenters." This is merely a proverb, applied to Balaam, which may also indicate contemporary mood about Jesus (already known from the Gospels), and is not directly about Mary or Jesus, nor an actual ruling.
Zohar, Bo 16 does not say "Christian extinction is a necessary sacrifice." This is attributed to the entire book "Zohar, Shemot" without paragraph citation, but this is the closest match in hand (aka Zohar 2:230 or 2:43a or 11:43a), given by Pranaitis in exaggerated form. The text (ויקרא כ' ע"א) (שמות י״ג:י״ג) וְכָל פֶּטֶר חֲמוֹר תִּפְדֶּה בְשֶׂה וְגוֹ' .... וְאִם לֹא תִפְדֶּה וַעֲרַפְתּוֹ .... לְאִתְמָחֲאָה מִן סֵפֶר חַיִּים, דְּעָלַיְיהוּ אִתְּמַר, (שמות ל״ב:ל״ג) מִי אֲשֶׁר חָטָא לִי אֶמְחֶנּוּ מִסִּפְרִי can be translated: "[Lev. 20:1, Ex. 13:13] And every donkey's firstborn shall be redeemed with a lamb, etc. .... And if it is not redeemed, you shall kill it .... To be blotted out of the book of life, so he said of them [Ex. 32:33], he who has sinned against me will be removed from my account." However, this is very basic Scriptural exegesis. If this were to be applied to a Gentile as Pranaitis hints, Torah context would be that the human must be redeemed with a lamb and could not be killed. This is not Talmud or command or halakhah; by the time the Zohar surfaced, disdain for Christianity was already present, but there is no genocidal text.
Mishneh Torah, Foreign Worship and Customs of the Nations 10, 12th century, which can be adventurously spelled as "Hilkkoth Akum" 10:1 (rulings of worshippers of stars and constellations), does not say "Do not save goyim in danger of death .... Show no mercy to the goyim." It says: "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." This is not Talmud, is not about goyim but is limited to idolaters (with Jewish idolaters being mentioned separately), and refers only if one's own life would be at risk. Deut. 7:2 is limited to the seven nations in Canaan judged for their idolatry, who were in a state of war with Israel and were not to be shown mercy, so Maimonides extends this to other hypothetical known idolaters.
Mishneh Torah, Foreign Worship and Customs of the Nations 10 is also adventurously called the otherwise inscrutable "Torah c. 10". The standard text correctly reads "To whom do the above apply? To Gentiles. It is a mitzvah, however, to eradicate Jewish traitors, minim, and Epicureans, and to cause them to descend to the pit of destruction, since they cause difficulty to the Jews and sway the people away from God." (Not "minimize".) This is the actual view of Maimonides, and refers to diverters, sectarians, and Epicureans, but only from the Jews, as Gentiles were outside this jurisdiction. Now, a variant censored reading exists, but it cannot be held to be the considered opinion of Maimonides or the conclusion of Judaism (as defined by the standard text): "As Jesus of Nazareth and his students, and Zadok, Boethus, and their students". Since it's Jews only, this doesn't refer to Christians at large but to marranos, whom other Jews treated singularly. The actual relationship between the unit "Jesus and students" and minim is not stated, but it's clear that whoever wrote it considered marranos at large to include some who diverted Israel. But the formal opinion of Maimonides is that the definition of "min" applied to separation from the community and commands (which marranos did but many Messianics today do not), and that the mitzvah involved is only about self-defense. Specifically, one is not to pity an attacker (Deut. 25:12) or stand idle (Lev. 19:16), but warns the attacker and prevents an attack on another's life, preferably nonlethally. So it's not about killing other than in an immediate attack, and cannot apply to sect without a judgment that the sect strikes at the heart of Jewish community, and even then only applies to eradicating the perceived threat of blood (which in this case should always be doable nonlethally as Deut. 25:12 hints). The part about the pit is not a mitzvah but an inference from Ps. 55:23, assuming the attacker is in fact wicked. All this comes from Maimonides, the book of mitzvoth, explaining the exact mitzvah, so in the quote he is simply drawing an application to marranos as to removing any life threat they pose. Since his views often moderated at different times, he must be taken as a whole, but it's granted that this passage found in nonstandard copies of his book does reflect his times and is challenging for modern Jews to deal with.
Zohar, Bereshit 20:228, found in Rohling 1883 (footnote 82) as "Sohar I. 25 b", does not say "Jene, welche sich bestreben, den Akum Gutes zu thun, ihre Seelen werden nicht auferstehen" (Google translate, "Those who strive to do good to the star and constellation worshipper, their souls will not rise"). It says "These were Uzza and Azael; from them the 'mixed multitude' derive their souls, and therefore they also are called nefilim, because they fall into fornication with fair women. For this, God casts them out from the future world, in which they have no portion, and gives them their reward in this world." This is about specific Nephilim, spirit beings, not about Jews. Rohling ignorantly interprets the Gen. 6 conversation of the sons of God and daughters of men as if it refers to any Jew doing any good to any Gentile, which is totally unrelated.
Makkot 7b:4 does not say "You will be innocent of murder if you attempt to kill a Christian" and isn't about Christians at all. It's an extended discussion on manslaughter (unintentional). 3-4 says, "The Sages taught: Unintentionally, exclude the intentionally .... Intentionally? Obvious, he is subject to death. Rather, Rava said: Say, exclude the says 'It is permitted'. Abaye said to, If says 'It is permitted', he a victim of circumstances beyond his control." This cites Num. 35:11, and the context that murder (intentional) is capital and manslaughter (unintentional) is to be exiled. The argument is that the word "unawares" in Numbers creates a third category, and this is then defined as the person who is too incompetent to be tried, who can't learn the obvious about the law because he justifies himself contrary to it. (While this category can be and has been abused, the fact that it should exist is not in question.)
Shabbat 116a does not say "Jews must destroy the books of the Christians." This is an extended hypothetical about what books are worth breaking Sabbath law for if they are on fire. The general rule is 115a: "All sacred writings, one may rescue them from the fire." Actual text: "The blank folios and the scrolls of heretics, one does not rescue them from the fire .... And just as they are not rescued from the fire, neither are they rescued from a rockslide, nor from water, nor from matter that destroys them." Though one rabbi recommends respect for the holy Name in heretical books, meaning saving the text is permitted, the clear majority ruling is that due to heresy God even lets his Name be effaced. Though there is animus against the New Testament, there is no active destruction in mind, merely rescue of heretical books from disaster by natural "matter".
Bava Batra 54b (Talmud 4:3:54b) accurately says: "Rav Yehuda says Shmuel says: Property of a Gentile, it is like a desert; anyone who takes possession of it acquired it. What is the reason? Gentile relinquishes from when money reaches his hand, Jew does not acquire until the deed reaches his hand." In immediate context, this is not referring to all property of Gentiles, but to that which is being sold to a Jew. The distinction is that between payment and any delay in the receipt of the deed, it is possible that another Jew might claim squatter or other rights, and that would need adjudication. This has nothing to do with the world being ownerless.
Gittin 56b-57a has been misquoted repeatedly and variously. Actual quote: "Onkelos ... went and raised Jesus [the Nazarene?] from the grave through necromancy .... Said to him: What is the punishment of that man? Said to him: with boiling excrement." It appears "Nazarene" has been added; "Yeshu" is apparently a conflation of Jesus, and the student of ben Perahya, and the son of Paphos ben Judah, and others. Other observations about the hesitant theology and the rashly joking context appear in a previous study. The nine interpretative cautions there apply throughout this list.
Rosh Hashanah 17a accurately says, "But the heretics; ... and the apostates; who denied the Torah; ... and separated from the ways of community ... descend to Gehenna and are judged there for generations and generations." This appeals to Is. 66:24 and makes it literally "for eons of eons." Heretics, minim, means separatists (e.g. tritheists, not specifically Christians); apostates means Epicureans (hedonists); next are deniers of Torah (not Talmud); then those without community (assembly). Other categories appear also. Flatly, Talmud contains no judgment that followers of Jesus as Messiah are minim, nor is this about rejection of Talmud.