elliottttt
Bronze
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2026
- Posts
- 470
- Reputation
- 529
Sometimes i want to stop being anti semetic and we can all get along - then i remember what the talmud says
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
my guy what context justifies any of thisAll of those are taken out of context tbh
The OTT stuff you see are not moral prescriptions but legal descriptions
A dumb question but didn’t whoever that wrote ts know that books are an open resource and soon one day can be bought by anyone or disguised with a long nose, black robe and an hat?
yea they did thats why they included thisA dumb question but didn’t whoever that wrote ts know that books are an open resource and soon one day can be bought by anyone or disguised with a long nose, black robe and an hat?
It's Rabbinic law, the central text in rabbinic Judaism (modern Judaism). There's no amount of context that can save any of those verses or the things they teach, and funnily enough they get even worse with context.All of those are taken out of context tbh
The OTT stuff you see are not moral prescriptions but legal descriptions
Inb4 he learns that every religious book has references to/outright states that disbelievers who blaspheme should be murdered (oh but the context broooo)Sometimes i want to stop being anti semetic and we can all get along - then i remember what the talmud says
View attachment 4890182
Dw. They’re building a third one and we’ll finally have our messiahRabbinic judiasm was established as a form of control after the destruction of the 2nd temple. The talmud is believed to be based on oral tradition
Find me any verse in Christianity that says anything even remotely similar.Inb4 he learns that every religious book has references to/outright states that disbelievers who blaspheme should be murdered (oh but the context broooo)
Not even comparable to this shit, Christianity doesn't say that at allInb4 he learns that every religious book has references to/outright states that disbelievers who blaspheme should be murdered (oh but the context broooo)
Right, the biblical anti-christ. Then once the new world order is established we will "bow down and beg to be enslaved".Dw. They’re building a third one and we’ll finally have our messiah
And is followed to this day as THE central text in modern Judaism.It was written in the Middle Ages by Jews that were still seething about Rome destroying the temple, and they were getting kicked out everywhere for doing evil stuff so lashing out over that as well
We will eat ze bugs and we will be happy. We will own nothing and be happy.Right, the biblical anti-christ. Then once the new world order is established we will "bow down and beg to be enslaved".
Luke 19:27, tho it has "Context" saving it. Also murder and enslavement is normal as shit in the old testament, God tells niggas to rape and pillage quite a few times. I just figured you'd want a source for it in the new testament, given how common it is in the old oneNot even comparable to this shit, Christianity doesn't say that at all
This is taken out of context
Samuel, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Numbers, all have God command genocide and murder of people as a whole (guess the reason). Unless you wanna argue that "Oh it was back then... It's not written as a law", but a Jew could cope about the Talmud one way or another as wellFind me any verse in Christianity that says anything even remotely similar.
Not that I don't hate the Jews or anything obviouslyRight, obviously you know nothing about Christian theology so don't speak on it. These are all Old Testament books, which were fulfilled with the new testament and the coming of Christ.Samuel, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Numbers, all have God command genocide and murder of people as a whole (guess the reason). Unless you wanna argue that "Oh it was back then... It's not written as a law", but a Jew could cope about the Talmud one way or another as wellNot that I don't hate the Jews or anything obviously
Can we justify a perfect unchanging moral creator's past actions, by saying "Oh that happened, Jesus was born and it doesn't matter anymore"? Maybe bro. Maybe. Mirin the adhom thoRight, obviously you know nothing about Christian theology so don't speak on it. These are all Old Testament books, which were fulfilled with the new testament and the coming of Christ.
Its an encyclopedia not a law book. The actual halakha comes from later books.It's Rabbinic law, the central text in rabbinic Judaism (modern Judaism). There's no amount of context that can save any of those verses or the things they teach, and funnily enough they get even worse with context.
If you actually are J3.wish, you should know the accelerationists are not on your sideDw. They’re building a third one and we’ll finally have our messiah
To have everybody accept it is to have ideality from every person's subjective perspectiveRight, the biblical anti-christ. Then once the new world order is established we will "bow down and beg to be enslaved".
fact check truebecause jews are satanists
Are you retarted? Do a bit of research before posting bsIts an encyclopedia not a law book. The actual halakha comes from later books.
First of all, watch your tone. You would never insult me in person so dont do it online. If you did, I would make you eat my shit from a plate with a knife and fork and tell me its oishii like a good boy.Are you retarted? Do a bit of research before posting bs
This is like the first thing you learn when you begin studying the bible. I'll make this very simple for you. Christian theology states that God's nature is unchanging, but the way he chooses to interact with the world will be different in different circumstances. The Old Testament's laws were part of a specific covenant with the ancient Israelites in a Godless fallen world. With the coming of Jesus, God incarnate, everything in the Old Covenant was fulfilled and God was brought into the world making redemption possible. Your initial argument was that Christianity calls for the slaughter of non-believers, but the passages you gave were time-bound commands and not moral rules which were finished with the coming of the Messiah. In fact, Christianity discourages anything even remotely close to this all throughout the New Testament (what is actually followed).Can we justify a perfect unchanging moral creator's past actions, by saying "Oh that happened, Jesus was born and it doesn't matter anymore"? Maybe bro. Maybe. Mirin the adhom tho
I would insult to your face and you would do nothing. Holy shit that might have been the corniest thing I've ever read.First of all, watch your tone. You would never insult me in person so dont do it online. If you did, I would make you eat my shit from a plate with a knife and fork and tell me its oishii like a good boy.
Secondly, I said what I said. Anyone can look it up. The law comes from books like the shulchan aruch and its commentaries where all the troublesome passages in the torah are qualified. The talmud is not definitive. Its the substance from which form is derived.
Luke 19:27, tho it has "Context" saving it.
I mean you asked for a part of Christianity that has anything even remotely similar to such laws, and I showed you a part, then as I said you went on to use "context" to argue how it's invalid. Every mainstream religion does the same thing, Islamic apologisits have copes, judaist niggas have copes.This is like the first thing you learn when you begin studying the bible. I'll make this very simple for you. Christian theology states that God's nature is unchanging, but the way he chooses to interact with the world will be different in different circumstances. The Old Testament's laws were part of a specific covenant with the ancient Israelites in a Godless fallen world. With the coming of Jesus, God incarnate, everything in the Old Covenant was fulfilled and God was brought into the world making redemption possible. Your initial argument was that Christianity calls for the slaughter of non-believers, but the passages you gave were time-bound commands and not moral rules which were finished with the coming of the Messiah. In fact, Christianity discourages anything even remotely close to this all throughout the New Testament (what is actually followed).
Christians do not follow the Old Testament. Very simple. In fact, the ENTIRE religion is based on the Messiah coming and putting an end to all the weird things they did.I mean you asked for a part of Christianity that has anything even remotely similar to such laws, and I showed you a part, then as I said you went on to use "context" to argue how it's invalid. Every mainstream religion does the same thing, Islamic apologisits have copes, judaist niggas have copes.
Peep the reply to the other guy that I replied to at the start of that one. I figured you'd check that one as well when I made it. But sure if we wanna argue that god himself is unchanging and perfect, but the way he interacts with the world is somehow changing based on the times, and all his past actions are irrelevant now because it's a new era. I cba to get into a bigger debate on thisChristians do not follow the Old Testament. Very simple. In fact, the ENTIRE religion is based on the Messiah coming and putting an end to all the weird things they did.
why is the skye blue ahh questionSometimes i want to stop being anti semetic and we can all get along - then i remember what the talmud says
View attachment 4890182
It's 4 am I'm about to go to bed so I'm not really trying to debate theology but this is literally so stupid I have to address it (and I'm not even Christian). It's a parable Jesus told about a Nobleman (a fictional character in a story). Those are the fictional character in Jesus' story's words, not his lmfaoPeep the reply to the other guy that I replied to at the start of that one. I figured you'd check that one as well when I made it. But sure if we wanna argue that god himself is unchanging and perfect, but the way he interacts with the world is somehow changing based on the times, and all his past actions are irrelevant now because it's a new era. I cba to get into a bigger debate on this
The foundation of the talmud is the old testament. The same foundation as christianity.I would insult to your face and you would do nothing. Holy shit that might have been the corniest thing I've ever read.
Right, I don't disagree but when the foundation to your religion is morally evil then it's no surprise that those following it are just as bad. These verses are part of where Jews all over the world in positions of power get not only justification but encouragement for the evil they commit on a large scale.
why are we acting like the abrahamic books were good anyways?The foundation of the talmud is the old testament. The same foundation as christianity.
Yes, but if you don't read the context for it, which a lot of "Christians" for whatever reason tend to do, It can be used to justify violence against those who don't worship the same god. It's in the new testament as Well and says something similar to the Talmud, which is what you asked for anyways. Regardless good nightIt's 4 am I'm about to go to bed so I'm not really trying to debate theology but this is literally so stupid I have to address it (and I'm not even Christian). It's a parable Jesus told about a Nobleman (a fictional character in a story). Those are the fictional character in Jesus' story's words, not his lmfao
The foundation of Christianity is that Jesus is the new covenant and that everything he said completed everything said in the Old Testament.The foundation of the talmud is the old testament. The same foundation as christianity.
islamInb4 he learns that every religious book has references to/outright states that disbelievers who blaspheme should be murdered (oh but the context broooo)


Lol, how some people reject wisdom is wild to me, but you're probably a faggot that'll quote some cow-worshipping mud muncher to seem cultured.why are we acting like the abrahamic books were good anyways?
In no way shape or form can a story Jesus told about a corrupt nobleman and why it's bad to be like him be used to justify the murder of non-believers. Show me where it says that in the New Testament and I'll believe you. I implore you because Christianity says to be at peace with others and strictly forbids murder.Yes, but if you don't read the context for it, which a lot of "Christians" for whatever reason tend to do, It can be used to justify violence against those who don't worship the same god. It's in the new testament as Well and says something similar to the Talmud, which is what you asked for anyways. Regardless good night
All of those are taken out of context tbh
I'm not claiming the new testament says to kill disbelievers 5head, I'm just saying there's a line in it that can be interpreted as that (albeit by being a retard), the reason I even remembered this one is because I've seen TikTok posts of niggas quoting it and trying to argue what I said. The original claim was "Show me anything in Christianity that even remotely resembles that", you said the old testament doesn't count, and this one is saved by context (they both are parts of the bible that say something similar to the Talmud and are saved by "Context") what part of this do you not get?In no way shape or form can a story Jesus told about a corrupt nobleman and why it's bad to be like him be used to justify the murder of non-believers. Show me where it says that in the New Testament and I'll believe you. I implore you because Christianity says to be at peace with others and strictly forbids murder.
Let's say some religion said "Apples are yummy. We should all eat apples. Apples are a perfect fruit. We shouldn't eat Rotten ones, though."I'm not claiming the new testament says to kill disbelievers 5head, I'm just saying there's a line in it that can be interpreted as that (albeit by being a retard), the reason I even remembered this one is because I've seen TikTok posts of niggas quoting it and trying to argue what I said. The original claim was "Show me anything in Christianity that even remotely resembles that", you said the old testament doesn't count, and this one is saved by context (they both are parts of the bible that say something similar to the Talmud and are saved by "Context") what part of this do you not get?
Lol, there are disputations in the Sanhedrin and other Talmudic discussions about permissible ages for having penetrative sex with 3 y/o and under; they had these disputations because it was a persistent occurrence in Jewish communities. They're evil fucks.Let's say some religion said "Apples are yummy. We should all eat apples. Apples are a perfect fruit. We shouldn't eat Rotten ones, though."
Basically you're arguing that since it says that last sentence someone could take it out of context and say "well we can't eat apples because our religion forbids it"?
That's just retarted.
nooo bro but but like all religions have similar things because a fictional story Jesus told while trying to spread a message against the things in the story had a bad person in it brooLol, there are disputations in the Sanhedrin and other Talmudic discussions about permissible ages for having penetrative sex with 3 y/o and under; they had these disputations because it was a persistent occurrence in Jewish communities. They're evil fucks.
First of all, your response doesn't make sense, but I'll try to engage with what I think you're saying.nooo bro but but like all religions have similar things because a fictional story Jesus told while trying to spread a message against the things in the story had a bad person in it broo
@Throw_Away ur a retarted kike faggot