Talmudic laws allow much worse than pedophilia, as long as it is done to goyim. Nothing new here.
I did find the Lerner connection strange initially because of Podesta's extensive links to the Vatican/Jesuits. But by now I consider them one big evil cult. A Satanic oecumene.
The Talmud does not endorse pedophilia. Shills are trying to get us branded as anti-semites, racists, neo-nazis, etc. Shill network coming out of the woodwork to upvote this post. OP accusing me of being a shill for deleting original post due to lack of a source.
Edit: Look at all the blatant anti-semitism in this thread. The proof is in the pudding. At least one user saying I must be Jewish, LOL.
I've called you a shill before and now you're calling me one.
@Millenial_Falcon is a mod whom I respect and he's calling it out as well, so if you're calling me a shill, you're calling him/her a shill too.
I "didn't even attempt to read your rebuttals" because I don't even know what you're talking about; I didn't comment to you nor did I read anything from you, so I have no idea what you're talking about. The post looked like bullshit, and millenial falcon thought so too, and I responded to millenial's comment in agreement.
I never said you were for "sure" Millennial Falcon, I said I suspect it b/c there are many people here that have alters and have been proven to be alters.
Peace, we are on the same side, right? go forth and fire away with your thought cannons! (just don't be a loose cannon - the forum, not me, will shut that down fast.)
So you just automatically go to a board and write meaningless messages without even investigating the claim or data? Makes sense for someone of lesser intelligence. Pos scum.
Ichiban tends to think in black and white. You are either a Christian or not, everything else is suspect. I have commented to her recently that pizzagate is not owned by a Christian perspective.
A close reading of the bible would allow the assertion that it promotes polygamy for example beause Abraham had two or more wives. Or that emotional child abuse is okay in the name of Christian worship because God asked Abraham to decapitate his child so he went through all the motions before he was stopped, which must have been terrifying for the kid. etc.
You're opinion is so thoroughly off of christian tradition and history. First of all nowhere in the bible does it actually condone polygamy and this is well supported by New Testament which is the fulfilment of the OT and is the law. Just b/c a leader in ancient times was temporarily allowed to procreate with concubines b/c they were surrounded on all sides by their enemies does not mean that we can do the same today and no rational christian would ever think this... however there are CLEAR texts in the Talmud that do allow for rape of children. And the fact that you've ignored this in every single post you've written on this thread is pretty telling.
Also, the story of Abraham and Isaac is a lot more complex than you're making it out to be. Isaac was already sacrificed spiritually when God asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. Abraham knew God could do anything and was not worried about Isaac physically dying b/c he had trusted God up to that point to birth Isaac in Sarah's old age which was a miracle unto itself in their minds. Abraham knew that God would raise Isaac from the dead (foreshadowing of Jesus), and was not worried about this, but what God was doing is telling. He was testing Abraham. Whether Abraham had faith in God, and he succeeded. Obviously he was blessed for this and God stopped him.
Your comment is a typical argument made by atheists that I've encountered before - it's nothing new, but you are misunderstanding both cases when people like David had to have multiple wives for their very survival and existence as a race of people when men of war fighting age were often killed off in war and had to be replenished somehow.
Bahahaha you can't even respond or refute b/c you know you're logic is fucking twisted.... You're sitting here trying to compare that some ancient view of child rape being in a book that they still read today and accept as one of their most revered Rabbis doesn't hold any water, b/c well there are examples in the OT of King David having concubines, which one could use today as condoning polygamy, when no real christian actually condones polygamy. Classic.
I've researched this before and like any religion - including Christianity - there are different interpretations. Take homosexuality for instance. Some give specific references that it's forbidden in the Bible while other say it isn't, or that it was in the Old Testament only and that the New Testament doesn't speak of it so it overrides the OT.
Same is true of the Talmud. I have multiple links that contradict this finding. Not hard to find. Here's one:
https://archive.is/pR6AG
Some people claim that Orthodox Judaism permits adult men to have sex with little girls. Actually, this is true. In fact, the Shulchan Aruch Even Ha’ezer section 37 is entitled “All the Laws of Betrothing a Little Girl”. However, certain stringent conditions must be met before this union is condoned by Talmudic law.
Early-teen marriage was possible in Judaism. According to the Talmud, a father is commanded not to marry his daughter to anyone until she grows up and says "I want this one".[74] A marriage that takes place without the consent of the girl is not an effective legal marriage.[75]Despite the young threshold for marriage, a large age gap between the spouses was opposed,[76] and, in particular, marrying one's young daughter to an old man was declared as reprehensible as forcing her into prostitution.[77]
A ketannah (literally meaning "little [one]") was any girl between the age of 3 years and that of 12 years plus one day;[78] she was subject to her father's authority and he could arrange a marriage for her without her agreement.[78] However, after reaching the age of maturity, she would have to agree to the marriage to be considered as married. If the father was dead or missing, the brothers of the ketannah, collectively, had the right to arrange a marriage for her, as had her mother.[78] In these situations, a ketannah would always have the right to annul her marriage even if it was the first.[79]
Not beating a dead horse, you have to refute this being in the talmud in the first place... you linked to a completely anonymous source.
The interpretation offered by your source is one of the utmost twisting of definitions when the object of the sentence is whether or not the man has caused any injury to a girl less than 3 years and 1 day. IT'S CLEARLY WRITTEN that if an adult man has sex with a girl less than 3 years and 1 day that she does not get any dowry b/c she can't lose her virginity due to her inability of not losing her hymen...
One is a total psycho if you come to any other conclusion of this passage in Kethuboth 11b
Actually it is. I'm not sure if you're even able to mentally process what a rebuttal is. I'll spell it out for you since you're having trouble. Your source claims that Kethuboth 11b has nothing to do with sexual rape of a converted slave of less than 3 years and 1 day but that it's about whether a dowry can be judged to be higher or not.
It completely ignores a huge posit of Kethuboth 11b which is about whether a man has to pay a dowry for a converted slave of less than 3 years and 1 day which Kethuboth 11b clearly states that one does not b/c she can not lose her virginity "it's as if putting a finger into the eye" as she has no hymen and will be able to appear as a virgin later in life b/c her husband at that time will be able to prove the hymen has broken through bleeding. You're inability to even comprehend this most basic facet is astonishing and disgusting considering the ramifications to your interpretation which is sympathy towards condoning sexual rape of a child less than 3 years and 1 day.
which is about whether a man has to pay a dowry for a converted slave of less than 3 years and 1 day which Kethuboth 11b clearly states that one does not b/c she can not lose her virginity "it's as if putting a finger into the eye" as she has no hymen and will be able to appear as a virgin later in life b/c her husband at that time will be able to prove the hymen has broken through bleeding.
I am not disputing the literal meaning of the text. The link I posted provides a reasonable interpretation of the context and how the passage was meant to be interpreted. It is not justifying pedophilia.
And I just rebutted it. YOUR link COMPLETELY ignores the distinction between 3 years and 1 day... it doesn't even mention it in fact. It's trying to make Kethuboth 11b appear as if it didn't even write about this distinction of less than and greater than this age which is to completely miss the interpretation the rabbis were debating in the first place which is whether there is any injury or harm done to a child less than 3 years and 1 day or not and whether the man is liable for paying her for losing her virginity to WHICH THEY CONCLUDE THAT SHE IS NOT INJURED AND THAT HE DOES NOT HAVE TO PAY ANY COMPENSATION..... You can't be this dunder headed and doltish.
YOUR source also completely IGNORED the 3rd case which is a boy who has sexual relations with a woman.
Hey ASSHOLE, notice how I separated out Kabbalists from real jews. This is the same as say real christians and those who pervert it such as Jim Jones (this is really simple). Go to your local library and pull out a Babylonian Talmud and read for yourself... the evidence is there. The Kabbalists know this and HIDE behind ADL and any criticism... This is clear as day for anyone with an IQ above 75. If you can't make simple distinctions then god help you.
@Millennial_Falcon you're OFFICIALLY put on shill alert... NO MOD HAS AS NEGATIVE Upvote/downvote ratio as you do:
Submissions: This user has upvoted 312 and downvoted 518 submissions
You don't understand... the guy is a total shill and has been called such by numerous people. He already deleted my thread once without even trying to rebut my claim and cited that I didn't have a link to the emails I originally provided. Then I reposted and he comes back but instead of deleting the threat he starts his attack with a very amateur source that didn't even have the full interpretations. If you read my rebuttals to his you'll obviously come to the same conclusion. Not really worried.
MF is a MOD that takes a lot of flak from every direction. You are way out of line with this entire argument - you need to realize your Christian viewpoint is extreme and cherry picking a few passages out of an ancient book of worship does not necessarily apply to modern adherents of a religion. The same thing can be done with the bible.
Address this - What are Podesta's actual interactions with this person - he recieved a newsletter? Is that all? There are no records of responses from Podesta back to Lerner according to a commenter below. Is that true? The Podesta's are Italian Catholics, do you have any proof that Podesta converted to Judaism?
This isn't a christian viewpoint... omg.... you can't be this dumb.
I've also refuted your idiotic OT claims (which is a Jewish book as well). You're comparing rape of a child to King David having concubines.... you seriously can't be this stupid.
I noticed you did not RESPOND to the link I posted that provides a rebuttal of the "Talmudic pedophilia" claim!
you're OFFICIALLY put on shill alert
SAME TO YOU.
NO ONE HAS AS NEGATIVE Upvote/downvote ratio as you do:
That speaks FOR me, not AGAINST me. The biggest weapons shills are using against us are DISINFORMATION and FORUM SLIDING. Of course GOOD posts are outnumbered by BAD, WEAK, our outright DISINFO posts. Also, bad posts are much easier to spot than good posts. Verifying a good post requires thoroughly inspecting all the evidence and connections.
No actually, these are things that have been bubbling for quite some time. It's unfortunate that they are frothing over here, now in @ich1baN 's sub, but it was boud to happen sooner or later.
Remember, we recently had one Mod who was deleting 200 subs. Deleted account. There are more lurking
Numbchuck only deleted like 15 posts before he was caught. I'm not convinced he was even a shill. More likely an emotionally unstable person. If he was a shill, he would have deleted a lot more posts much more quickly, to cause an uprising against moderation.
But just so we are clear here, you're still cool with this attack on me:
@armyseer has banned you from v/pizzagateshills for the following reason: DYNCorp / Posted this nonsense
YOU defended him saying "well shithappens, friendly fire and whatnot"
I don't think it is just unfortunate - Ichiban is a proselytizing christian zealot that thinks anyone who is not christian is trafficking with the devil. Trust me, I've been through this with OP already.
Taking these ancient texts and then painting any modern practicioner of a religion with the cherry picked worst passages is just not what pizzagate is about as an investigation or as journalism. What ichiban wrote here is the exactly wrong way to reveal Podesta's misdeeds. It ain't based on a NON PROVEN association with a religious man. And it is not what we need to be focused on.
Ichiban is a loose cannon. Cannons can be very helpful for a cause, but fired in the wrong direction, they are destructive.
You're a complete fucking retard. I've made no such claim. Take your doltish tripe and skulk somewhere else. This isn't cherry picking anything. It's what is in the Talmud and if something of this nature were in any book I read, I'd have them take it out and thoroughly refute it.
The fact that you can't recognize this simple fact is really telling of your background b/c you have some sympathies to people that practice the occult as you've stated in other threads before - so you therefore are sympathetic to Kabbalists since they are heavily involved in the same divination that you so love yourself.
You're literally comparing condoning child rape to King David's concubines.... it's a seriously stupid assertion that you're making and not even a well thought out comparison, but sloppy thinking begets sloppy conclusions.
Not going to argue here esp. with one of the more dubious mods, if only because it would entice me to once more dive into the vile racism, etnocentrism and perversion of talmudic law.
view the rest of the comments →
Singleservename ago
Talmudic laws allow much worse than pedophilia, as long as it is done to goyim. Nothing new here.
I did find the Lerner connection strange initially because of Podesta's extensive links to the Vatican/Jesuits. But by now I consider them one big evil cult. A Satanic oecumene.
Millennial_Falcon ago
CALLING BULLSHIT. http://talmud.faithweb.com/articles/three.html
The Talmud does not endorse pedophilia. Shills are trying to get us branded as anti-semites, racists, neo-nazis, etc. Shill network coming out of the woodwork to upvote this post. OP accusing me of being a shill for deleting original post due to lack of a source.
Edit: Look at all the blatant anti-semitism in this thread. The proof is in the pudding. At least one user saying I must be Jewish, LOL.
Theupsidedown ago
So delete the fucking post then.
Why put "accuracy in question?" Just fucking delete it. This post is horseshit. It's this kind of thing that discredits the whole investigation.
ich1baN ago
No it doesn't. You're a complete shill too then and didn't even attempt to read my rebuttals. You people are disgusting.
Theupsidedown ago
Rebuttals to what? I'm not commenting on anything you've rebutted. Check yourself.
Theupsidedown ago
I've called you a shill before and now you're calling me one.
@Millenial_Falcon is a mod whom I respect and he's calling it out as well, so if you're calling me a shill, you're calling him/her a shill too.
I "didn't even attempt to read your rebuttals" because I don't even know what you're talking about; I didn't comment to you nor did I read anything from you, so I have no idea what you're talking about. The post looked like bullshit, and millenial falcon thought so too, and I responded to millenial's comment in agreement.
Fuck off.
VieBleu ago
This shill bs is ridiculous, now Ichiban is sure that I am Millenial Falcon, but also a shill.
ich1baN ago
I never said you were for "sure" Millennial Falcon, I said I suspect it b/c there are many people here that have alters and have been proven to be alters.
VieBleu ago
Peace, we are on the same side, right? go forth and fire away with your thought cannons! (just don't be a loose cannon - the forum, not me, will shut that down fast.)
ich1baN ago
So you just automatically go to a board and write meaningless messages without even investigating the claim or data? Makes sense for someone of lesser intelligence. Pos scum.
Theupsidedown ago
No, dumbass, I responded to SOMEONE ELSE. So I don't know what YOU wrote ELSEWHERE.
Stupid fuck
ich1baN ago
Calm down psycho babble.
Theupsidedown ago
Eat a dick, faggot.
apparatchik1488 ago
Are you jewish?
VieBleu ago
Ichiban tends to think in black and white. You are either a Christian or not, everything else is suspect. I have commented to her recently that pizzagate is not owned by a Christian perspective.
A close reading of the bible would allow the assertion that it promotes polygamy for example beause Abraham had two or more wives. Or that emotional child abuse is okay in the name of Christian worship because God asked Abraham to decapitate his child so he went through all the motions before he was stopped, which must have been terrifying for the kid. etc.
ich1baN ago
You're opinion is so thoroughly off of christian tradition and history. First of all nowhere in the bible does it actually condone polygamy and this is well supported by New Testament which is the fulfilment of the OT and is the law. Just b/c a leader in ancient times was temporarily allowed to procreate with concubines b/c they were surrounded on all sides by their enemies does not mean that we can do the same today and no rational christian would ever think this... however there are CLEAR texts in the Talmud that do allow for rape of children. And the fact that you've ignored this in every single post you've written on this thread is pretty telling.
Also, the story of Abraham and Isaac is a lot more complex than you're making it out to be. Isaac was already sacrificed spiritually when God asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. Abraham knew God could do anything and was not worried about Isaac physically dying b/c he had trusted God up to that point to birth Isaac in Sarah's old age which was a miracle unto itself in their minds. Abraham knew that God would raise Isaac from the dead (foreshadowing of Jesus), and was not worried about this, but what God was doing is telling. He was testing Abraham. Whether Abraham had faith in God, and he succeeded. Obviously he was blessed for this and God stopped him.
Your comment is a typical argument made by atheists that I've encountered before - it's nothing new, but you are misunderstanding both cases when people like David had to have multiple wives for their very survival and existence as a race of people when men of war fighting age were often killed off in war and had to be replenished somehow.
VieBleu ago
please summarize in a tl:dr this kind of stuff is a waste of time for this forum
ich1baN ago
Bahahaha you can't even respond or refute b/c you know you're logic is fucking twisted.... You're sitting here trying to compare that some ancient view of child rape being in a book that they still read today and accept as one of their most revered Rabbis doesn't hold any water, b/c well there are examples in the OT of King David having concubines, which one could use today as condoning polygamy, when no real christian actually condones polygamy. Classic.
Ronnilynn31 ago
I've researched this before and like any religion - including Christianity - there are different interpretations. Take homosexuality for instance. Some give specific references that it's forbidden in the Bible while other say it isn't, or that it was in the Old Testament only and that the New Testament doesn't speak of it so it overrides the OT.
Same is true of the Talmud. I have multiple links that contradict this finding. Not hard to find. Here's one: https://archive.is/pR6AG
Some people claim that Orthodox Judaism permits adult men to have sex with little girls. Actually, this is true. In fact, the Shulchan Aruch Even Ha’ezer section 37 is entitled “All the Laws of Betrothing a Little Girl”. However, certain stringent conditions must be met before this union is condoned by Talmudic law.
The Shulchan Aruch Even Ha'ezer section 37 references Wikipedia https://archive.is/V378y
Early-teen marriage was possible in Judaism. According to the Talmud, a father is commanded not to marry his daughter to anyone until she grows up and says "I want this one".[74] A marriage that takes place without the consent of the girl is not an effective legal marriage.[75] Despite the young threshold for marriage, a large age gap between the spouses was opposed,[76] and, in particular, marrying one's young daughter to an old man was declared as reprehensible as forcing her into prostitution.[77] A ketannah (literally meaning "little [one]") was any girl between the age of 3 years and that of 12 years plus one day;[78] she was subject to her father's authority and he could arrange a marriage for her without her agreement.[78] However, after reaching the age of maturity, she would have to agree to the marriage to be considered as married. If the father was dead or missing, the brothers of the ketannah, collectively, had the right to arrange a marriage for her, as had her mother.[78] In these situations, a ketannah would always have the right to annul her marriage even if it was the first.[79]
ich1baN ago
And just so you can see evidence clear in front of your face... I will post this here for all to see the proof the Talmud condones child rape:
https://archive.is/PWDR1
Millennial_Falcon ago
You still haven't responded to the rebuttal in the link I provided. You are just beating a dead horse.
ich1baN ago
Not beating a dead horse, you have to refute this being in the talmud in the first place... you linked to a completely anonymous source.
The interpretation offered by your source is one of the utmost twisting of definitions when the object of the sentence is whether or not the man has caused any injury to a girl less than 3 years and 1 day. IT'S CLEARLY WRITTEN that if an adult man has sex with a girl less than 3 years and 1 day that she does not get any dowry b/c she can't lose her virginity due to her inability of not losing her hymen...
One is a total psycho if you come to any other conclusion of this passage in Kethuboth 11b
Millennial_Falcon ago
Still not a response to the rebuttal.
ich1baN ago
Actually it is. I'm not sure if you're even able to mentally process what a rebuttal is. I'll spell it out for you since you're having trouble. Your source claims that Kethuboth 11b has nothing to do with sexual rape of a converted slave of less than 3 years and 1 day but that it's about whether a dowry can be judged to be higher or not.
It completely ignores a huge posit of Kethuboth 11b which is about whether a man has to pay a dowry for a converted slave of less than 3 years and 1 day which Kethuboth 11b clearly states that one does not b/c she can not lose her virginity "it's as if putting a finger into the eye" as she has no hymen and will be able to appear as a virgin later in life b/c her husband at that time will be able to prove the hymen has broken through bleeding. You're inability to even comprehend this most basic facet is astonishing and disgusting considering the ramifications to your interpretation which is sympathy towards condoning sexual rape of a child less than 3 years and 1 day.
@YingYangMom @Investigate1999 @Vindicator @Spoor @yuke @redditsuckz @followdamoney @disciple7 @viebleu @victuruslibertas @Singleservename @wokethefkup @queen_laqueefa @Fateswebb @ich1ban @OrwellKnew @andrevandelft @carmencita @quantokitty @biebergangrape
Millennial_Falcon ago
I am not disputing the literal meaning of the text. The link I posted provides a reasonable interpretation of the context and how the passage was meant to be interpreted. It is not justifying pedophilia.
ich1baN ago
And I just rebutted it. YOUR link COMPLETELY ignores the distinction between 3 years and 1 day... it doesn't even mention it in fact. It's trying to make Kethuboth 11b appear as if it didn't even write about this distinction of less than and greater than this age which is to completely miss the interpretation the rabbis were debating in the first place which is whether there is any injury or harm done to a child less than 3 years and 1 day or not and whether the man is liable for paying her for losing her virginity to WHICH THEY CONCLUDE THAT SHE IS NOT INJURED AND THAT HE DOES NOT HAVE TO PAY ANY COMPENSATION..... You can't be this dunder headed and doltish.
YOUR source also completely IGNORED the 3rd case which is a boy who has sexual relations with a woman.
@OrwellKnew @BLOODandHONOUR
OrwellKnew ago
Remember now....@Millenial_Falcon is just sooo, soo, so busy. He barely has ANY TIME to upvoat people
But yet he can waste time on this nonsense, j/s
ich1baN ago
Right. lol.
ich1baN ago
Hey ASSHOLE, notice how I separated out Kabbalists from real jews. This is the same as say real christians and those who pervert it such as Jim Jones (this is really simple). Go to your local library and pull out a Babylonian Talmud and read for yourself... the evidence is there. The Kabbalists know this and HIDE behind ADL and any criticism... This is clear as day for anyone with an IQ above 75. If you can't make simple distinctions then god help you.
@Millennial_Falcon you're OFFICIALLY put on shill alert... NO MOD HAS AS NEGATIVE Upvote/downvote ratio as you do:
@OrwellKnew
VieBleu ago
you need to CALM DOWN - calling people vulgarities does not promote your point of view whatsoever.
ich1baN ago
You don't understand... the guy is a total shill and has been called such by numerous people. He already deleted my thread once without even trying to rebut my claim and cited that I didn't have a link to the emails I originally provided. Then I reposted and he comes back but instead of deleting the threat he starts his attack with a very amateur source that didn't even have the full interpretations. If you read my rebuttals to his you'll obviously come to the same conclusion. Not really worried.
VieBleu ago
MF is a MOD that takes a lot of flak from every direction. You are way out of line with this entire argument - you need to realize your Christian viewpoint is extreme and cherry picking a few passages out of an ancient book of worship does not necessarily apply to modern adherents of a religion. The same thing can be done with the bible.
Address this - What are Podesta's actual interactions with this person - he recieved a newsletter? Is that all? There are no records of responses from Podesta back to Lerner according to a commenter below. Is that true? The Podesta's are Italian Catholics, do you have any proof that Podesta converted to Judaism?
ich1baN ago
This isn't a christian viewpoint... omg.... you can't be this dumb.
I've also refuted your idiotic OT claims (which is a Jewish book as well). You're comparing rape of a child to King David having concubines.... you seriously can't be this stupid.
Millennial_Falcon ago
I noticed you did not RESPOND to the link I posted that provides a rebuttal of the "Talmudic pedophilia" claim!
SAME TO YOU.
That speaks FOR me, not AGAINST me. The biggest weapons shills are using against us are DISINFORMATION and FORUM SLIDING. Of course GOOD posts are outnumbered by BAD, WEAK, our outright DISINFO posts. Also, bad posts are much easier to spot than good posts. Verifying a good post requires thoroughly inspecting all the evidence and connections.
VieBleu ago
Smells like forum sliding.
OrwellKnew ago
No actually, these are things that have been bubbling for quite some time. It's unfortunate that they are frothing over here, now in @ich1baN 's sub, but it was boud to happen sooner or later.
Remember, we recently had one Mod who was deleting 200 subs. Deleted account. There are more lurking
Millennial_Falcon ago
Numbchuck only deleted like 15 posts before he was caught. I'm not convinced he was even a shill. More likely an emotionally unstable person. If he was a shill, he would have deleted a lot more posts much more quickly, to cause an uprising against moderation.
OrwellKnew ago
But just so we are clear here, you're still cool with this attack on me: @armyseer has banned you from v/pizzagateshills for the following reason: DYNCorp / Posted this nonsense
YOU defended him saying "well shithappens, friendly fire and whatnot"
VieBleu ago
I don't think it is just unfortunate - Ichiban is a proselytizing christian zealot that thinks anyone who is not christian is trafficking with the devil. Trust me, I've been through this with OP already.
Taking these ancient texts and then painting any modern practicioner of a religion with the cherry picked worst passages is just not what pizzagate is about as an investigation or as journalism. What ichiban wrote here is the exactly wrong way to reveal Podesta's misdeeds. It ain't based on a NON PROVEN association with a religious man. And it is not what we need to be focused on.
Ichiban is a loose cannon. Cannons can be very helpful for a cause, but fired in the wrong direction, they are destructive.
ich1baN ago
You're a complete fucking retard. I've made no such claim. Take your doltish tripe and skulk somewhere else. This isn't cherry picking anything. It's what is in the Talmud and if something of this nature were in any book I read, I'd have them take it out and thoroughly refute it.
The fact that you can't recognize this simple fact is really telling of your background b/c you have some sympathies to people that practice the occult as you've stated in other threads before - so you therefore are sympathetic to Kabbalists since they are heavily involved in the same divination that you so love yourself.
You're literally comparing condoning child rape to King David's concubines.... it's a seriously stupid assertion that you're making and not even a well thought out comparison, but sloppy thinking begets sloppy conclusions.
ich1baN ago
I updated my OP and provided you an original source link to a direct translation of the Talmud by Rabbi Dr. Tzvee Zahavy. I'll post it a 3rd time:
http://i64.tinypic.com/a31shx.png
Source to original image: http://www.halakhah.com/ (English Babylonian Talmud)
Millennial_Falcon ago
Still not a response to the rebuttal. I award you no points. May God have mercy on your soul.
catslovejustice ago
Where is your link for rebuttal? It is not showing up in my feed. Thanks!
Millennial_Falcon ago
It's in my comment at the top of the thead. (Embedded in "CALLING BULLSHIT")
catslovejustice ago
Oh, I see it now. Thanks.
Singleservename ago
Cause any criticism of (orthodox) judaism, even its inhumane aspects, is anti-semitic, neo-nazi racism? Got it.
VieBleu ago
again, total black and white thinking from this corner.
Millennial_Falcon ago
NO. Because your criticism seems to be bullshit, and because Amalek and other shills have been pushing this "Talmudic pedophilia" shit for a while.
Singleservename ago
Not going to argue here esp. with one of the more dubious mods, if only because it would entice me to once more dive into the vile racism, etnocentrism and perversion of talmudic law.
Millennial_Falcon ago
and you base this on what? I'm one of the hardest-working mods. doesn't make me "dubious." I also worked my ass off writing the summary sticky.
Singleservename ago
Ok I'll qualify: controversial. I don't follow those discussions at all. Just see you name coming up all the time.
Defending the positions of a religious freak like Lerner is a losing game anyway.
Btw good work on the sticky.
Millennial_Falcon ago
I don't know anything about Lerner. I just know Amalek was pushing this Talmudic-pedophilia stuff, and I found a well-argued rebuttal.
Thanks.