The Protocols of Zion?

[Kate Story]

I have never been on this site before but I know what is reported in this article is true. I have been following most of this for some time. Follow the money!

http://newsfromthewest.blogspot.com/2008...ce-of.html

[David Guyatt]

Can't say that I agree with you on that. Those laws are derived only from the Talmud...

And?

I can see nothing particularly objectionable to the seven Noahide laws:

1.Idolatry is forbidden.
2.Incestuous and adulterous relations are forbidden.
3.Murder is forbidden.
4.Cursing the name of G-d is forbidden.
5.Theft is forbidden.
6.Eating the flesh of a living animal is forbidden.
7.Mankind is commanded to establish courts of justice

Have you attempted to compare the seven Noahide laws to the Ten Commandments of Moses - which even today remain a centrepiece to Christian moral and religious thinking? Who was Moses? Not Christian, I think.

The Lubavitch movement is strictly a Talmudic/Caballah sect and if you have never read the Talmud, you really should.

I haven't read the Talmud nor indeed the Bible, although in my youth I studied comparative religions. I have a fairly extensive library on the Qabalah and can discuss it in considerable depth if called upon to do so and in the mood (but why bore people for no good reason). Is this bad of me? Or must I be the token Gentile member of an odd Jewish sect to read those books?

The book of Sanhedrin instructs Jewish men how to have sex with little girls as long as they are at least 3 years and one day old. It also instructs them on having sex with little boys and I believe the age is 7 for them. It tells when and how a woman can have sex with little boys and also animals. It teaches that sex with a corpse is not a sin since the body is dead. It also teaches that all non-Jews are dogs and less than human. If Bush is truly the pedophile he is reported to be, this is the book for him.

I didn't see any of this stipulated in the seven Noahide laws btw? Nor can I find any scholarly reference to a "Book of the Sanhedrin" and doubt such a title actually exists outside of truly bizarre conspiracy literature (or are you talking about the "Tract Sanhedrin?" which is altogether different). More importantly, the Sanhedrin were founded in 191 BCE and were dissolved after the destruction of the second Temple 70 CE. As far as sexual bestiality goes the Marquis de Sade - who enjoyed rape, bestiality and necrophilia - is far more current (died 1814). Ditto Sir Francis Dashwood, founder of the Hellfire Club, circa 1750. Ditto the powerful and well connected bastards who today run the international paedophile networks that we have discussed extensively elsewhere on this forum. What happened 2000 years ago -- supposing these claims are correct (?) is old news isn't it.

Anyway, if you can point me in the direction where "The Book of the Sanhedrin" is acknowledged by religious scholars then I'll certainly commit to look at it.

I really do not care how many honors this man was given or by whom. Lip service is given many many times to those whom something will be expected later.

Nor do I. But the US was apparently constituted on the seven Noahide laws, I suspect because these laws were the forerunners of the Laws of Moses and, indeed, are most similar to the latter. I still don't see the big deal here? I also don't understand the anti semitic context you appear to put forward in your arguments. Many in the US establishment were aligned with or close to Hitler and the Nazis prior to - and during - WWII. There is a history of fascism in the US. Why focus on the Jews of biblical times and a Jewish sect that evaporated almost 2000 years ago? I don't get it.

The Christians are riled up over this as they know the worship of any other god other than the insane OT yahweh is forbidden and according to the Talmud is punishable by death. They fail to see that ALL worship other than the Talmudic god will be forbidden but since their's is the 'only' true one they care not for anyone else.

I likewise have little time for the crazy Christians either (as distinct from the great bulk of peace loving Christians). They are a radical minority sect focused on spreading anger and hate. Let's also not forget more recent Christian history when anyone who voiced their doubts about Christ was tortured and murdered in the most appalling way by the Inquisition. Mankind history is littered with intolerance and that intolerance has never been limited to one race or religion but moves across all of them like a foul wind.

I am not a religious person but when one group tries to force their system of belief on the world, I have a huge problem with that.

Nor am I and I share your attitude -- but you really should be venting yourself on the Christian faith too because it actively proselytizes as an article of faith.

I began reading the Talmud many years ago and it is rotten and hateful.

Really?

[David Guyatt]

Religion and it's hold on mankind has more to do with where we are at this point in history than most people realize. It is just as dangerous as rotten politics and is used as a control of masses.

Is that all religion Kate or just your chosen hateful Old testament Talmudic, Torah and Jewish religion?

Do you apply the same passion to other religions as you do the Jewish religions? For example Buddhism, Taoism, Chanism, Mohammedism, Hinduism, Sikhism, Sufism, Confucianism, Shintoism, Jainism, Satanism...

Where do your bounds begin and end?

[Kate Story]

David, I see you have made many statements and asked many questions. I will have to write a page or two to answer your post but it will be late tonight before I have that much time. Sit tight. I can't wait to get hold of this one!

[Kate Story]

David, this is in reply to your comments and questions.

I can see nothing particularly objectionable to the seven Noahide laws:

1.Idolatry is forbidden.
2.Incestuous and adulterous relations are forbidden.
3.Murder is forbidden.
4.Cursing the name of G-d is forbidden.
5.Theft is forbidden.
6.Eating the flesh of a living animal is forbidden.
7.Mankind is commanded to establish courts of justice
The idolatry indicated here is the worship of any other deity other than the god of the Talmudic jews, the OT god. The penalty for not worshipping this monster or breaking any of these laws is beheading. Jews do not follow these laws as they were created for all non-jews. It only takes the ‘witness’ of one Jew to condemn a non-jew and the punishment is losing your head. Here are Talmud writings you can look up as I included the text for you. Don’t miss number 6! Here is the link to the online Talmud you can use to verify these.
http://www.come-and-hear.com/tcontents.html

1. Sanhedrin 59a: "Murdering Goyim is like killing a wild animal."
2. Abodah Zara 26b: "Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed."
3. Sanhedrin 59a: "A goy (Gentile) who pries into The Law (Talmud) is guilty of death."
4. 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."
5. 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.
6. Yebhamoth 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age."
Really terrible, huh? Allowing a victim of child abuse to get on with her life, and be treated as if she were 7. Schabouth Hag. 6d: "Jews may swear falsely by use of subterfuge wording."
8. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Do not save Goyim in danger of death."
9. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Show no mercy to the Goyim."
10. 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."
11. 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."
12. Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Dia 17: "A Jew should and must make a false oath when the Goyim asks if our books contain anything against them."
13. Baba Necia 114, 6: "The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts."
14. Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D: "When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves."
15. 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.

16. Aboda Sarah 37a: "A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."

17. Gad. Shas. 2:2: "A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl."
18. 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."
19. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 388: "It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere. It is permitted to kill him even before he denounces."

20. 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."
21. Tosefta, Abda Zara VIII, 5: "How to interpret the word 'robbery.' A goy is forbidden to steal, rob, or take women slaves, etc., from a goy or from a Jew. But a Jew is NOT forbidden to do all this to a goy."

22. Seph. Jp., 92, 1: "God has given the Jews power over the possessions and blood of all nations."
23. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 156: "When a Jew has a Gentile in his clutches, another Jew may go to the same Gentile, lend him money and in turn deceive him, so that the Gentile shall be ruined. For the property of a Gentile, according to our law, belongs to no one, and the first Jew that passes has full right to seize it."
24. Schulchan Aruch, Johre Deah, 122: "A Jew is forbidden to drink from a glass of wine which a Gentile has touched, because the touch has made the wine unclean."
25. Nedarim 23b: "He who desires that none of his vows made during the year be valid, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare, 'Every vow which I may make in the future shall be null'. His vows are then invalid."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Here are a few words of your good Rabbi. Read this and see if you still see nothing wrong.
In regard to the goal of world domination, Rebbe Schneerson stated: You can read more on the Hasidic Gentile Movement site at http://www.noahide.com/rebbe.htm
"The main avodah of this generation is to go out to the final war of the golus, to conquer and to purify all the gentile countries (such that 'and kingship will be Hashem's,' Ovadiah 1:21)."
--Shabbos Parshas VaYelech, 5746.
("Avodah" means a "spiritual mission," "prayer service" or "cleaving unto God." The "golus" refers to the "exile," i.e., Jews living in the Gentile world. "Hashem" is the unnamed "name" of the Jewish god.)
"Consequently, it is obvious and self-evident that in modern times we must carry out the Divine Command we received through Moshe [Moses]: 'To compel all human beings to accept the commandments enjoined upon the descendants of Noach.'" (Shabbos Parshas Tsav, 5747, Sichos in English, vol. 35, p. 75)
"We must therefore deduce that this is an auspicious time to conquer the world with Torah and Yiddishkeit in a pleasant and peaceful way: 'All the land is before you.'" (Bereshis 13:9). ("Conquer the World with Torah: A Message to the Shluchim Convention," 5747, Sichos in English, vol. 33, p.270)
"The Seven Laws must be explained in a way that the nations can relate to and, because non-Jews do not possess genuine free will, they will be willing to change more quickly and easily than a Jew." (Hisvaduyos 5748 3:183, cited in "The Deed is the Main Thing," Kol Boi Ha'olam, p. 385-386)
"Even in the future, the nations will continue to exist, to serve and help the Jewish people. This, then, is our lesson--to increase our activities in the areas where the many will be influenced: Jews, the world, and the nations" (Shabbos Parshas Vayeishev, 21 Kislev, 5745)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Have you attempted to compare the seven Noahide laws to the Ten Commandments of Moses - which even today remain a centrepiece to Christian moral and religious thinking? Who was Moses? Not Christian, I think.
There was nothing unique or original about the commandments. The same laws can be found in the Egyptian book of the dead and also in the law codes of King Hammurabi. Both of which predate the time of the Hebrews by hundreds of years. These are just basic rules anyone with common sense should follow. I am certain that even cave men objected to being killed or robbed. The hebrews learned those laws while in exile in Babylon and used them to control their people by telling them ‘god’ chose them among all the nations on earth. What a bunch of bull. I also believe the commandment for children to honor parents is one of the most dangerous rules for any child. It looks good on paper but I imagine children who are beaten and raped by their own parents would look at it differently. I believe a child should respect their parents if that parent has earned it. Children are the ones who have suffered most from religions they did not choose and had no say in the matter. It should be considered child abuse to force any religion on a child. Choosing to follow another ‘god’ was considered a major act of dishonoring a parent and children were stoned to death in the OT days. The priests used that commandment to ensure a continuing line of followers. During the deadly reign of the RCC people could believe or burn at the stake. What a lovely way to begin a religion. Muslims still practice honor killings and I have no doubt that Judaism and Christianity would still being doing the same if the laws permitted it. Those laws will change if the Noahide Laws are activated.
Which ten do you refer to? There are three different versions in the bible and they all vary. After Moses broke the original tablets, this is what Yahweh had to say, and I took the liberty of using this segment from the incredible work The Ten Commandments by Joseph Lewis which you can google and read the entire book. This is a very telling piece of work. BTW, these are the commandments that Moses put into the Ark and the Hebrews carted all over the place!!! LOl, if Christians insist on hanging the commandments, these are the ones that should be hung. Read and see if you can tell the problem. It is long but very important in understanding the lies and forgery that produced the bible.
Exodus, Chapter 34, verse 1:

1. And the Lord said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest.

Here is a promise that we hope will be fulfilled. We have every assurance that it will be done, for God tells Moses to "hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest."
I quote Chapter 34, verses 2 and 3:

2. And be ready in the morning, and come up in the morning unto mount Sinai, and present thyself there to me in the top of the mount.
3. And no man shall come up with thee, neither let any man he seen throughout all the mount; neither let the flocks nor herds feed before that mount.

The above verses repeat in effect the details that we noted in the previous ceremony concerning the preparation for this event. No one must go near the mount and "no man shall come up with thee."
I quote Chapter 34, verse 4:

4. And he hewed two tables of stone like unto the first; and Moses rose up early in the morning, and went up unto mount Sinai, as the Lord had commanded him, and took in his hand the two tables of stone.

Here is a most direct and unequivocal statement. Moses "hewed two tables of stone like unto the first ... as the Lord had commanded him, and took in his hand the two tables of stone." There can be no mistaking the event narrated here. The Lord had the Tables of Stone and he was to write upon them the same Commandments that appeared in the first tables which Moses in anger had smashed to pieces.
I quote Chapter 34, verses 5, 6 and 7:

5. And the Lord descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the Lord.
6. And the Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed, The Lord, The Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,
7. Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.

In the above verses we find the substance of part of the Second Commandment as recorded previously, which we take as an indication that the new code will resemble the previous one. However, in verse 6, quoted above, the Lord refers to himself as "merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth," in contradiction to being a jealous and vindictive god.
I quote Chapter 34, verses 8 and 9:

8. And Moses made haste, and bowed his head toward the earth, and worshipped.
9. And he said, If now I have found grace in thy sight, O Lord, let my Lord, I pray thee, go among us; for it is a stiffnecked people; and pardon our iniquity and our sin, and take us for thine inheritance.

Here again is the sense of "guilt" that is essential to secure the help of a god. For if the Children of Israel were not a "stiffnecked people," there would be no necessity to "pardon our iniquity and our sin," and for the Bible God to "take us for thine inheritance."
I quote Chapter 34, verse 10:

10. And he said, Behold, I make a covenant: before all thy people I will do marvels, such as have not been done in all the earth, nor in any nation: and all the people among which thou art shall see the work of the Lord: for it is a terrible thing that I will do with thee.

What follows is a set of Commandments used by the early Hebrew tribe and antedating the present Decalogue by many centuries! This set of Commandments not only proves the antiquity of the Biblical narrative, but is indisputable evidence of the evolutionary process of ethical and moral concepts. It is contended that these "covenants" deal only with the most primitive form of ritual duties and have no "moral" implication whatsoever, [*40] such as might be attributed to the later Decalogue.
It is the opinion of the best Biblical scholars that "God's covenant with the Israelites," [**41] which will be quoted below, is a set of "commandments" that were considered a revelation from God in the earliest days of their tribal existence, and are not in any sense a duplicate of the "words that were written in the first tables."
The strange thing about the rest of the verses of this chapter is that they record an entirely different set of commandments that only in part bear any resemblance to the previous ones. Some are similar in meaning and intent, and some are entirely different. It becomes a matter of vital interest as to what this code of "God's covenant with the Israelites" is composed of.
I quote Chapter 34, verses 11 to 14:

11. Observe thou that which I command thee this day: behold, I drive out before thee the Amorite, and the Canaanite, and the Hittite, and the Perizzite, and the Hivite, and the Jebusite.
12. Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land whither thou goest, lest it be for a snare in the midst of thee:
13. But ye shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves:
14. For thou shalt worship no other god: for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.

The above verses might be considered the substance of the first two Commandments as previously recorded, in which we are not interested at the moment. We are concerned with the Biblical assurance that God was to write upon this second table of stone "the words that were in the first tables."
To that end we continue the narrative, and I quote Chapter 34, verses 15, 16 and 17:

15. Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go a whoring after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and one call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice;
16. And thou take of their daughters unto thy sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods.
17. Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.

The purpose of this "covenant" was to keep the seed of the tribe of Israel from pollution by other tribes as a means of perpetuating the solidarity of the clan.
It is not my intention here to analyze this set of Commandments for its ethical or moral value. I record it simply because of its relationship to the narrative concerning the Tables of Stone. I think, however, that a comment on the language is pertinent, especially the use of the word "whoring." In primitive societies the crudity of language reflected the crudity of thought, and those who married outside the tribe were considered guilty of a heinous offense. Such an act was condemned as the lowest in human conduct, and therefore characterized as "whoring." "To go whoring" is a typical Biblical expression and reflects the low mental level of the Biblical authors. The prohibition against images is also stated.
I now quote Chapter 34, verses 18 to 26:

18. The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep. Seven days thou shalt eat unleavened bread, as I commanded thee, in the time of the month Abib: for in the month Abib thou camest out from Egypt.
19. All that openeth the matrix is mine; and every firstling among thy cattle, whether ox or sheep, that is male.
20. But the firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb: and if thou redeem him not, then shalt thou break his neck. All the firstborn of thy sons thou shalt redeem. And none shall appear before me empty. [**42]
21. Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest: in earing time and in harvest thou shalt rest.
22. And thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, of the firstfruits of wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year's end.
23. Thrice in the year shall all your men children appear before the Lord God, the God of Israel.
24. For I will cast out the nations before thee, and enlarge thy borders: neither shall any man desire thy land, when thou shalt go up to appear before the Lord thy God thrice in the year.
25. Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven; neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the Passover be left unto the morning.
26. The first of the firstiruits of thy land thou shalt bring unto the house of the Lord thy God. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk. [*43]

A condensation of these "covenants" into Ten Commandments gives one a better understanding of what was known as the earlier Decalogue of the Hebrew tribes.
Professor K. Budde, in his History of Ancient Hebrew Literature, has done this, and lists the Commandments as follows:

Thou shalt worship no other god (For the Lord is a jealous god).
Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.
All the first-born are mine.
Six days shalt thou work, but on the seventh thou shalt rest.
The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep in the month when the ear is on the corn.
Thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, even of the first fruits of the wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year's end.
Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread.
The fat of my feast shall not remain all night until the morning.
The first of the first fruits of thy ground thou shalt bring unto the house of the Lord thy God.
Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother's milk.

I had hoped that this set of Commandments would clear up the reason for the observance of the Sabbath day. The reader will recall that according to the Fourth Commandment in Exodus, Chapter 20, the Sabbath was to be observed, "for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea and all that in them is, and rested on the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it"; whereas the Fourth Commandment according to Deuteronomy, Chapter 5, states as follows: "And remember that thou west a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day." Instead, the reason given in this set of Commandments only adds more confusion to the conflicting claims.
The last "covenant" mentioned in verse 26, which reads, "Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk," will be extremely significant in the analysis of the Commandments. It will prove to be the key to the very foundation upon which the religion of the Children of Israel is based. In passing, I might mention that this Commandment is still observed by the orthodox Hebrews with the same fanatical zeal as any of the Commandments of the other Decalogues.
I quote Chapter 34, verses 27 and 28:

27. And the Lord said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel.
28. And he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And He wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

The fact that this set of Commandments is not in "the words that were in the first tables" is one of the most damaging contradictions yet found in the Bible. We have had repeated to us again and again that the Bible God was to write upon this second table of stone the words of the first, but now we are told that "the Lord said unto Moses, Write thou these words, for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with Israel." Not only are these covenants not an exact duplication of the Commandments as previously given, but Moses, and not God, performed the work. They are orders for the crudest conduct prevalent in the most primitive of societies.
Even if the second tables of stone were in existence, they would not have the same value as if they were written by God. But even if written by Moses and only dictated by God, they would still be of inestimable value. Since there is no mention of their destruction, we might appropriately ask: Where are these second tables of stone? If they were not destroyed, what happened to them?
There is another important difference between the narratives concerning the Ten Commandments as recorded in Exodus and Deuteronomy. These are just as vital as the "variants" of the texts already observed, and we shall proceed to examine them. In the Exodus version it is stated that "...God spake all these words, saying..." [*44] while the Deuteronomy version states, "And he wrote them in two tables of stone and he delivered them unto me." [*45]
Did the Bible God speak the Commandments and did Moses write them, or did God write them himself upon the two tables and give them to Moses? This is of extreme importance, because there is a vast difference between speaking "these words" and writing them. If Moses wrote them down after hearing God speak them, it is quite likely that an error might have been made in their transcription, especially if he wrote them after having fasted for forty days and forty nights. If an omnipotent God wrote them himself, there could be no possibility of error.
If this was to be a sacred bond between the Children of Israel and their God, the Bible Deity should not have delegated Moses to perform the task. Under these circumstances, the Commandments came to the Children of Israel at second hand, and cannot be considered in the same light as if they had come directly from God.
As for the Ten Commandments being a revelation of God to the children of the earth, I am constrained to quote Thomas Paine. He said:

"It is a contradiction in terms and ideas to call anything a revelation that comes to us at second hand, either verbally or in writing. Revelation is necessarily limited to the first communication -- after this, it is only an account of something which that person says was a revelation made to him; and though he may find himself obliged to believe it, it cannot be incumbent on me to believe it in the same manner; for it was not a revelation made to me, and I have only his word for it that it was made to him.
"When Moses told the children of Israel that he received the two tablets of the commandments from the hands of God, they were not obliged to believe him, because they had no other authority for it than his telling them so; and I have no other authority for it than some historian telling me so." [*46]

The assurance given in verse 1, Chapter 34, was not fulfilled. The first "tables were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables." This is in direct contradiction to the statement contained in verse 18, Chapter 31, which specifically states that God wrote them with his finger. I quote:

18. And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.

To conclude the introduction, I quote Exodus, Chapter 34, verses 29 to 35:

29. And it came to pass, when Moses came down from mount Sinai with the two tables of testimony in Moses' hand, when he came down from the mount, that Moses wist not that the skin of his face shone while he talked with him.
30. And when Aaron and all the children of Israel saw Moses, behold, the skin of his face shone; and they were afraid to come nigh him.
31. And Moses called unto them; and Aaron and all the rulers of the congregation returned unto him: and Moses talked with them.
32. And afterward all the children of Israel came nigh: and he gave them in commandment all that the Lord had spoken with him in mount Sinai.
33. And till Moses had done speaking with them, he put a vail on his face.
34. But when Moses went in before the Lord to speak with him, he took the vail off, until he came out. And he came out, and spake unto the children of Israel that which he was commanded.
35. And the children of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses' face shone: and Moses put the vail upon his face again, until he went in to speak with Him.

There is more revealed in this narrative of the Bible concerning the Tables of Stone and the Ten Commandments than merely the fictional basis of the revelation from Sinai. It is also indisputable evidence of a flagrant piece of religious fakery. This is the imposition upon mankind of a corrupting and demoralizing series of superstitious taboos as a divine code of morals. This we shall proceed to prove.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
The Lubavitch movement is strictly a Talmudic/Caballah sect and if you have never read the Talmud, you really should.

I haven't read the Talmud nor indeed the Bible, although in my youth I studied comparative religions. I have a fairly extensive library on the Qabalah and can discuss it in considerable depth if called upon to do so and in the mood (but why bore people for no good reason). Is this bad of me? Or must I be the token Gentile member of an odd Jewish sect to read those books? I don’t know what you have read but you missed the boat somewhere on this subject.

[quote[The book of Sanhedrin instructs Jewish men how to have sex with little girls as long as they are at least 3 years and one day old. It also instructs them on having sex with little boys and I believe the age is 7 for them. It tells when and how a woman can have sex with little boys and also animals. It teaches that sex with a corpse is not a sin since the body is dead. It also teaches that all non-Jews are dogs and less than human. If Bush is truly the pedophile he is reported to be, this is the book for him.[/quote]

I didn't see any of this stipulated in the seven Noahide laws btw?

How could you if, by your own admission, you haven’t read the Talmud??? Nor can I find any scholarly reference to a "Book of the Sanhedrin" and doubt such a title actually exists outside of truly bizarre conspiracy literature (or are you talking about the "Tract Sanhedrin?" which is altogether different).

What difference does it possibly make to call it a book, pamphlet, paper or tractate?!Sanhedrin contains over 700 pages which most people would consider a book.

More importantly, the Sanhedrin were founded in 191 BCE and were dissolved after the destruction of the second Temple 70 CE.

Where do you get your information? Is it long rumored that the Sanhedrin just went underground to operate just as our own ‘shadow government’ operates now. The Sanhedrin finally decided it was safe to go public with the likes of Bush and his cabal of perverts and lunatics on their side. They are all cut from the same cloth and both have the same desires to rule the rest of us.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Sanhedrin Recognizes Council to Teach Humanity ´Laws of Noah´


by Ezra HaLevi

(IsraelNN.com) A group of non-Jewish delegates have come to Jerusalem to pledge their loyalty to the Laws of Noah. They appeared before the nascent Sanhedrin, which established a High Council for B'nai Noach.
The ten delegates appeared before a special session of the Jewish High Court of 71 Rabbis led by its Nassi (President) Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz. B'nai Noach, literally "Children of Noah," also known as Noahides, are non-Jews who take upon themselves the Torah's obligations for all members of the human race. The seven such laws were passed on via Noah following the Flood, as documented in Genesis (see below).

The gathering took place under a banner quoting the Biblical passage in Tzefania 3:9which refers to "all the nations... speak[ing] a pure language... proclaim[ing] the name of G-d."

Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz addresses the Noahide Council members

The Noahide delegates stood before the nascent Sanhedrin, which was reestablished over a year ago in Tiberias, following the renewal of Biblical ordination, and has met regularly since then. "Each one [of the B'nai Noach] comes with a name he has made in the world, as a teacher and example in his community of observance of the seven laws of Noah," said Rabbi Michael Bar-Ron, the Sanhedrin's emissary who facilitated the council's organization, introducing the delegates. "At great physical and financial expense, they have flown across the world to Jerusalem, the holy city, to pledge before the court and all mankind, their allegiance to the Seven Laws of Noah, the laws of the Creator."
Entire article here: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/96347

As far as sexual bestiality goes the Marquis de Sade - who enjoyed rape, bestiality and necrophilia - is far more current (died 1814). Ditto Sir Francis Dashwood, founder of the Hellfire Club, circa 1750. Ditto the powerful and well connected bastards who today run the international paedophile networks that we have discussed extensively elsewhere on this forum. What happened 2000 years ago -- supposing these claims are correct (?) is old news isn't it. I am happy to know someone who is certain these things no longer exists. Could you please supply us with where you obtained those FACTS?


Anyway, if you can point me in the direction where "The Book of the Sanhedrin" is acknowledged by religious scholars then I'll certainly commit to look at it. http://www.come-and-hear.com/tcontents.html
Quote:
I really do not care how many honors this man was given or by whom. Lip service is given many many times to those whom something will be expected later.

Nor do I. But the US was apparently constituted on the seven Noahide laws, I suspect because these laws were the forerunners of the Laws of Moses and, indeed, are most similar to the latter. I still don't see the big deal here?
Since these laws are only for non-jews the word that comes to my mind is Fascism. Do you want a one world religion to go along with a one world government?
I also don't understand the anti semitic context you appear to put forward in your arguments. Many in the US establishment were aligned with or close to Hitler and the Nazis prior to - and during - WWII. There is a history of fascism in the US. Why focus on the Jews of biblical times and a Jewish sect that evaporated almost 2000 years ago?
I don't get it. It did not evaporate and there are many Jewish people who have never wanted any part of what the Zionist are doing.
Quote:
The Christians are riled up over this as they know the worship of any other god other than the insane OT yahweh is forbidden and according to the Talmud is punishable by death. They fail to see that ALL worship other than the Talmudic god will be forbidden but since their's is the 'only' true one they care not for anyone else.

I likewise have little time for the crazy Christians either (as distinct from the great bulk of peace loving Christians). They are a radical minority sect focused on spreading anger and hate. Let's also not forget more recent Christian history when anyone who voiced their doubts about Christ was tortured and murdered in the most appalling way by the Inquisition. Mankind history is littered with intolerance and that intolerance has never been limited to one race or religion but moves across all of them like a foul wind.
You can’t possibly read what I write and come away with any thought I am defending Christianity. I live in the south, was born into that hateful doctrine and lost the relationship with my family and most of my friends by walking away. It was the hardest decision I ever made and it was extremely painful. That was years ago and I wouldn’t go back and change a thing. Also, you are very wrong in assuming this fanatical religion is just a ‘fringe’ of lunatics. They number in the millions and Zionist Christians back the Israeli’s 100 percent because ‘god’ told them to. They think the next war will be the one to bring about the end so they can fly off to heaven while the rest of us burn in hell. Count yourself a lucky person for not having to suffer freeing yourself of religious lies. I am fully aware of the horrid history of Christianity and I am also aware of the hate and judgment that still is taught from the pulpits. Outsiders to any religion never truly understand what is taught and expected from it’s followers, just as any ‘secret’ organization, religions do their dirty work behind the scenes and out of the hearing of non-members. There are many Jews who are dead set against the Zionist movement and live in fear of war daily. You can google ‘Jews against Zionism’ and find numerous sites.
I am not a gifted researcher and where I live there are few that share my views, especially concerning religion. I am an ordinary person who desires the truth whatever it may be. I care about my family and I also care about the world I live in. I have children who will have to live with whatever the future holds and I want to do my part to make that future the best it can be. The truth is the only thing worth having and we have been given pitiful little of that.
Quote:
I am not a religious person but when one group tries to force their system of belief on the world, I have a huge problem with that.

Nor am I and I share your attitude -- but you really should be venting yourself on the Christian faith too because it actively proselytizes as an article of faith.
Once again, please read what I write without mental editing. That is very unfair. All three majors religions each claim to be the spokesmen for ‘god’ and each are willing to kill to prove it. The difference between the present and the past is the fact of weapons that could literally destroy this world. Religion is a form of insanity and no one could be more critical of Christianity as I am.
Quote:
I began reading the Talmud many years ago and it is rotten and hateful.

Really?

Yes, really! Really and truly!
How can you make any assessment on my comment when I have read the books and you haven’t?! Take a year or so and read it all and let me know your views.

One more thought. Maybe since beheading all goyim who break the Noahide Laws is the only punishment, the rumor of guillotines coming into this country by the hundreds may not be a rumor after all. If you need help navigating the books/ tractates of the Talmud I know how and will be happy to advise!

Sounds like the perfect twisted one world religion to go hand in hand with a twisted one world government to me.

[Magda Hassan]

1.Idolatry is forbidden.
2.Incestuous and adulterous relations are forbidden.
3.Murder is forbidden.
4.Cursing the name of G-d is forbidden.
5.Theft is forbidden.
6.Eating the flesh of a living animal is forbidden.
7.Mankind is commanded to establish courts of justice

Have you attempted to compare the seven Noahide laws to the Ten Commandments of Moses - which even today remain a centrepiece to Christian moral and religious thinking? Who was Moses? Not Christian, I think.

Well, it all depends on interpretation doesn't it?

While it is an historical fact that in western countries our laws are derived from Cannon Law. I, personally would prefer more separation of the church and state. I don't want to be judged according to anyone's religious laws. There are many things in the bible that are just plain wrong, by my standards, eg slavery, execution for wearing red dresses, dashing of little children against the rocks, but we are commanded to do them. I would rather use reason to work out what is good and just and that can change from one situation to another, instead of some motley collection of stories from desert tribes men who thought they could hear God talking to them. While I agree that not killing others and not stealing etc are generally good things and right in most situations I can also see situations where I would do both with a clear conscience.

As has been stated the Noahide laws are for non-Jews and if I were non-Jewish I would rather my government leave me out the whole shebang if they are going to sign up to them. I don't think it is the states place to endorse any particular religious laws what ever they are.

These are the original ten commandments:
1. Thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.
2. Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.
3. The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep. Seven days thou shalt eat unleavened bread, as I commanded thee, in the time of the month Abib: for in the month Abib thou camest out from Egypt.
4. Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest: in earing time and in harvest thou shalt rest.
5. And thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, of the firstfruits of wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year’s end.
6. Thrice in the year shall all your menchildren appear before the LORD God, the God of Israel.
7. Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven;
8. Neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the passover be left unto the morning.
9. The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring unto the house of the LORD thy God.
10. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s milk.



The others ones that Christians are wanting to put in their schools and courts are a second revised lot. This is just so typical of the cherry picking that goes onin religions.


Christians only use 10 laws while Jews have more than 600 to look out for if they are going to be in God's good graces.

[David Guyatt]

Thanks for your last post Kate. I am better able to understand your position now in light of your own personal experiences.

I was fortunate, I suppose, in not having any religious dogma thrust down my throat when I was young and am, as a consequence, fairly relaxed about most religions and can respect the moderate ones. By this I mean that I see the sole purpose and meaning of religion being to extend man’s consciousness of himself and to impose sensible and fair laws that advance civilized behaviour. Beyond that there are what you might term “religious techniques” that properly understood and practiced extend and enhance spiritual understanding and experience, although as I understand it these are not for themany.

What I cannot easily stomach is unblinking zealotry, dogma and intolerance -- which are, of course, the shadow hand-maidens of most major religions. I also seen religion in its essence as an instrument, for example like a knife which in the hands or a surgeon can be used to heal, or in those of a madman hands can be used to hack and harm. It cannot be sensible to blame the knife for being used in a murder, or worship the same knife for being used in an operating theatre. Intention is everything and each one of of us makes and thereafter endures the choice we make. Hence I think Jung was quite right when he said that “man is the cause of all coming evil”.

I ask that you do not associate me with Rabbi Schneerson

Here are a few words of your good Rabbi.

He is not my good rabbi. I associate myself with no religious faction whatsoever, whilst respecting most of the moderate ones - as I mentioned earlier. My comments were directed at your statement about the Noahide laws which in the light of their archaic historical background I still do not find unusual enough to get my knickers in a twist about.

Man has an exceedingly long history of cruelty and he does not always need a religion to bring this out in him. There have been plenty of evil bastards over the centuries who didn’t need a religious belief to visit their viciousness upon others. But I do agree that religion can be and has been well used to visit wickedness upon the innocent.

I also note that you have a tendency to misunderstand and misrepresent my statements. Hence:

As far as sexual bestiality goes the Marquis de Sade - who enjoyed rape, bestiality and necrophilia - is far more current (died 1814). Ditto Sir Francis Dashwood, founder of the Hellfire Club, circa 1750. Ditto the powerful and well connected bastards who today run the international paedophile networks that we have discussed extensively elsewhere on this forum. What happened 2000 years ago -- supposing these claims are correct (?) is old news isn't it. I am happy to know someone who is certain these things no longer exists. Could you please supply us with where you obtained those FACTS?

Quite how you reached this conclusion based on the foregoing paragraph I don't know, but it is not an accurate conclusion. If you read this forum deeper you will see clearly that I raise alarm bells to the point of tedium that this atrocious inhumanity continues to be perpetrated and, worse, it is protected at the very highest levels. But I don’t associate with a particular religion or religious faction - other than, perhaps, Satanism (which is a pretty damn poor descriptive term anyway).

For background on the Sanhedrin I simply Googled the name. That there is a rumour that the Sanhedrin went underground isn't really a surprise, but I would prefer something more solid than that to take it seriously as every religious and chivalric order of history sooner or later gets copied or re-invented by fame seekers and wingnuts. I cannot take seriously as historical continuity a group that came into being less than two years ago - after an absence of almost 2000 years. That is not to say that I regard them with any favour either.

Religion is a form of insanity and no one could be more critical of Christianity as I am.

Your personal religious experiences, as sadly unpleasant as they appear to be, are very unlikely to be typical of the many and your insights, therefore, are not well founded or balanced - it seems to me anyway? You will not be surprised that I don’t share the harshness of your views in this regard.

What difference does it possibly make to call it a book, pamphlet, paper or tractate?!Sanhedrin contains over 700 pages which most people would consider a book.

Call me silly then, but I like factual accuracy in posts as a verifiable reference point. The point I was making is that the “Book of the Sanhedrin” is not a recognized or known title. Even the use of the term the “Talmud” is not accurate insofar as there are two different Talmud’s - of which the Babylon Talmud seems to be the darker example (but I claim no great insights to either as I have said earlier).

You state that the

Sanhedrin finally decided it was safe to go public with the likes of Bush and his cabal of perverts and lunatics on their side.

I want evidence that this is factual rather than a conspiratorial belief. Your earlier post that referenced the Noahide laws are not evidence of the foregoing statement. That law was concerned with making March 26th 1991 “Education Day USA” - a one off day (of infamy perhaps?) in all of history in other words. It wasn’t proposed by Bush (but by Robert H Michel, Joe Biden Jr and Richard Gephardt), it was passed unanimously by both the House and Senate and thereafter signed into law by Bush. A curious law perhaps but you have yet to demonstrate it is conspiratorial in its intent.

What you mean to say, I think, is that you believe this law to be a callous cipher that was surreptitiously designed to ease open the door for the reintroduction of archaic and arcane religious laws at some point in the future? I personally would need a lot more hard evidence to buy into this, as things are quite bad enough already without the need for such laws, when law-breaking without punishment is clearly the name of the game these days.

[Magda Hassan]

While there are certainly people in positions of power, some of whom abuse their power and act criminally, who are Jewish there are also more people who are not Jewish doing just the same. One doesn't have to be Jewish to support a racist ideology like Zionism and many Jews, even Orthodox religious Jews totally reject political Zionism.

It is a very tricky area and not always easy for some one uneducated in the history to get a clear picture. There is often confusion between political and spiritual Zionism just for starters. Some critics of Zionism have some pretty weird ideas of their own and less than honorable agendas often hidden. Other racist groups such as Nazis and white supremacists are anti-Zionist but for all the wrong reasons. They are also anti-Semitic. Some of the web sites and publications talking about the Protocols and Jewish history and/or theology are a propaganda tool promoted by other religious groups usually Christian sects sometimes Muslim sects but often undeclared as such.

Jews have been criticized as keeping too much to their own kind, rejecting others on the one hand while on the other they are accused of infiltrating and wanting to take over the host nation. So it is a bit of a no win situation. That Jews have connections to Israel is undoubtedly true. Not because someone called god gave it to them but because they are there and for most there is no where for them to go back to. Romanian father and Iraqi mother child born in Israel. This has long been accepted as a fact of life by all Palestinian leaders. What has not been accepted by Israeli leaders is the rights of Palestinians to return home and there will be no peace until that injustice is made right. Palestinians in the diaspora worry about their relatives in Gaza and the West Bank and in Israel. Jews outside Israel worry about their relatives in Israel and the occupied territories.

Quaker families as well as other Protestant families have also had much to do with the banking industry. The Vatican bank is (or was) involved with arms manufacturing, money laundering and pharmaceutical companies that made contraceptive pills and hospitals that provided terminations. Given the number of dead bodies connected to them they seem to have had their Murder Inc.

People who identify as Jews or who are identified as Jews are just as happy to rip off and exploit other Jews as any one else. I know this from personal experience and observation and we just have to see what a trail of destruction Madoff has done to some (many) in the Jewish community to see it in action.

Bastards and criminals come in all religious flavors and none.

[David Guyatt]

Bastards and criminals come in all religious flavors and none.

Very true. There are very many caring and civilized Jews as their are Catholics and members of other religions including Muslims. What we need to focus our attention on are the extremists, usually a small but vociferous minority in most religions, who preach hate and murder.

Over the years I have exercised discontent with the Vatican because it is a temporal power that claims to practice spiritual beliefs - and because it actually doesn't practice (and for all I know doesn't actually believe) what it preaches. This is distinct from the tens of millions of caring Catholics around the world who try to selflessly live their beliefs in carrying out good works in their community.

[Kate Story]

Bastards and criminals come in all religious flavors and none.

Very true. There are very many caring and civilized Jews as their are Catholics and members of other religions including Muslims. What we need to focus our attention on are the extremists, usually a small but vociferous minority in most religions, who preach hate and murder.

Over the years I have exercised discontent with the Vatican because it is a temporal power that claims to practice spiritual beliefs - and because it actually doesn't practice (and for all I know doesn't actually believe) what it preaches. This is distinct from the tens of millions of caring Catholics around the world who try to selflessly live their beliefs in carrying out good works in their community.

David, the Rabbi comment was made tongue in cheek and not meant to offend you. I am sorry that it did. Apparently my world is quite different from most members here. It is very difficult, if not impossible to give a clear view of areas and of people who are consumed with a religious doctrine. If you want to see how rabid evangelical/fundamentalism can be you can google John Hagee, if you can stomach him, and it should amaze you that thousands follow this man from his physical congregation and millions more by way to television.

I can promise you if you lived in the deep south and you asked almost any christian what they thought of the war between Israel and the Arabs they would not hesitate to tell you this is bible prophecy being fulfilled. They will also inform you that christians are told by god to bless and pray for Israel. They see no wrong with anything Israel does because they were once gods chosen. God took the covenant away from them and gave it to the christians but the christians are convinced they must be loyal to Israel in order to 'save' them at the end. I asked a fanatical zionist lady once what she thought of the little children dying in this battle and she said that the Arab children would just grow up to be devils so they were better off dying while they were innocent! Of course the Jewish children went to be with god but it was a sin that their lives were cut short.

This is the mindset in the twillight zone of fundamental fanaticism. From what I have see and heard all my life is there is no doubt that government and religion go hand in hand. Pastors influence their followers in many areas of life and politics is one of them. Do a google on 'FEMA using pastors' to keep them obedient to the government if martial law is enforced. The churches must keep that tax exempt status at any cost!