Talmud Vs Torah (Old Testament) aka Traditions of Men Vs God's Law R_0706
Sean Cyril O'Tavish
<catamont-DE42F2...@tribune.sj.sys.us.xo.net> Sara Salzman
<cata...@concentric.net> wrote:
>In article <f0767v0p1s0st7lu8...@4ax.com>,
> Tavish <t--avi-...@RemoveHyphens2MAILix.n-etc-om.com> wrote:
>
>[hateful, anti-Semitic drivel snipped]
Hateful anti-semitic drivel? I quoted what Jewish writers wrote and you imply I
am an anti-semite for quoting Jews? I didn't think the Jews (who I quoted) could
be anti-semites but then again all groups of people have their self loathing
types. We Gentiles have liberals and they are very self loathing when it comes
to our American Culture and Heritage but that is another story for another post.
BTW why don't you try to refute what I posted rather than imply I am an
anti-semite. Is the real reason because you don't want to imply your fellow Jews
who I quoted are liars or is it easier to attack the messenger rather than deal
with the subject?
Once again for the archives:
<START>
LOOK! <<Not all links in the following may be active today>>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=87pe4ucivs1g2n9avi9h9t5ru23n6ebla2%404ax.com&rnum=5
Subject: Circumcision and Sucking on Penis by Rabbis is a Jewish Practice (Link
is Illustrated) UPDATED EDITION R_17
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 18:14:32 -0600
Message-ID: <87pe4ucivs1g2n9av...@4ax.com>
Much Requested Classic Repost!
http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/mohel.htm
(Click the link above to verify the contents and to see pictures
which appeared in The Jerusalem Post magazine)
Shabbath 19:2
They may perform on the Sabbath all things that are needful for circumcision:
excision, tearing, sucking [the wound], and putting thereon a bandage and cumin.
If this had not been pounded up on the eve of the Sabbath a man may chew it with
his teeth and then apply it.
The Mishnah
Translated by Herbert Danby
Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1933. pp. 116-117.
Shabbat 133B
II.1.
A. Suck [out the wound]:
B. Said R. Pappa, "A Surgeon who didn't suck out the wound - that is a source of
danger, and we throw him out."
C. So what else is new? Obviously, since we are prepared to desecrate the
Sabbath on that account, it is certainly dangerous not to do it!
D. What might you have supposed? That this blood is stored up. So we are
informed that it is the result of the wound, and in the status of a bandage and
cumin: Just as when one doesn't put on a bandage and cumin, there is danger, so
here, too, if one doesn't do it, there is danger.
The Talmud of Babylonia: An American Translation
Translated by Jacob Neusner
Number 275. Volume II.E: Shabbat Chapters 18-24.
Program in Judaic Studies Brown University
Atlanta: Scholars Press. 1993. p. 45.
[The brackets in the quotes below are in the texts quoted.]
"There are three stages required for the performance of a ritually correct
circumcision in Jewish law: the removal of the foreskin; the tearing of the
underlying membraene so as to expose the glans completely; and the sucking away
of the blood, m'tsitsah." Roger V. Pavey. The Kindest Cut of All. Bognor Regis,
W. Sussex: New Horizon. 1981. pp. 87-88.
"The method to be adopted is laid down thus: 'One excises the foreskin, [that
is] the entire skin covering the glans, so that the corona is laid bare.
Afterwards, one tears with the finger-nail the soft membrane underneath the
skin, turning it to the sides until the flesh of the glans appears. Thereafter,
one sucks the membrane until the blood is extracted from the [more] remote
places, so that no danger [to the infant] may ensue; and any circumciser who
does not carry out the sucking procedure is to be removed [from his office].' .
. . The operation itself, then, consists of three distinct acts: the excision of
the prepuce; the laceration of the mucous membrane covering the glans; and the
sucking of the blood from the interior of the wound." Immanuel Jakobovits.
Jewish Medical Ethics: A Comparative and Historical Study of the Jewish
Religious Attitude to Medicine and Its Practice. New York: Bloch Publishing
Company. 1959. pp. 193-194.
"The baby cried, blood flowed on to his penis and - as the rabbi had predicted -
Graham [the godfather] did not faint. The rabbi then bent over the baby and
sucked the wound. I know this sounds awful, but it is part of the Jewish
tradition. It's supposed to help the healing." Jack Shamash. "My Son on the
Cutting Edge." Independent (London), no. 3,797 (Thursday, December 17, 1998): p.
R8.
"And what of the practice of sucking the bleeding penis? While condemning the
procedure, some physicians contend that it was used to stop bleeding.47 Not only
is there little evidence for this theory, but it was also a largely ineffective
method. Furthermore, even in antiquity, surgeons had better methods to stop
bleeding, such as pressure, instruments, and medication.48 According to Dr. H.
Speert (1953), Maimonides 'staunchly supported this procedure [sucking the
bleeding penis] as a prophylactic measure against inflammation.'"49 Edward
Wallerstein. Circumcision: An American Health Fallacy. New York: Springer
Publishing Company. 1980. p. 160.
"mezizah -- Hebrew term for the third step in the Jewish circumcision ritual, in
which the mohel applies his mouth to the freshly circumcised infant's penis and
sucks up the first drops of blood. In more recent times this procedure has been
carried out via a tube, as infections, venereal disease, and tuberculosis,
sometimes resulting in the death of the infant, have occurred due to
contamination of the wound. Most Jewish circumcisors today have eliminated this
step from the circumcision ritual. Critics have attributed sadistic and
homosexual implications to this practice, while defenders claim that this was
simply all that was known during ancient times to stop the bleeding." Rosemary
Romberg. Circumcision: The Painful Dilemma. South Hadley, Massachusetts: Bergin
& Garvey, Publishers, Inc. 1985. p. 395.
"The traditional practice of metzitzah b'peh, which has its roots in the
earliest history of the Jewish people and has survived unchanged to the present
time, should be viewed with great respect. It is spoken of very positively in
the Jewish literature on circumcision both as an essential part of the ritual
and as a health measure which prevents infection and promotes healing." Henry C.
Romberg, M.D. Bris Milah: A book about the Jewish ritual of circumcision.
Jerusalem/New York: Feldheim Publishers. 1982. pp. 57-58.
<END>
http://www.act-now.org/discuss/
This Discussion Group is moderated by a group of Mohel's
associated with ACT to whom you can post questions
you may have about circumcision.
http://www.act-now.org/discuss/_disc1/00000111.htm
What Are The Details Of "Mezizah," The Practice Of Sucking The Blood From The
Circumcision Wound?
From: Pat
Date: 10/19/99
Time: 2:32:54 AM
Comments
On a web page listing "Serious Complications Of Circumcision"
(http://faculty.washington.edu/gcd/DOC/foreskin.html), they mentioned
"Tuberculosis - via Mezizah, the practice of sucking the blood from the
circumcision wound, the mohel gives the disease to the infant."
What, exactly, are the details of this "Mezizah"?
And how prevalent through this obviously unsanitary practice is the spread of
tuberculosis and other diseases and infections?
<END>
http://www.faem.com/debate/a0809am.htm
[...]
"As for the bris milah (circumcision), there is no masturbation of the child. In
some Orthodox circles, the mohel, after the cutting, will fill his mouth with
wine, suck on the wound, and then spit out the wine and blood mixture in his
mouth. This is done to stanch the blood flow and disinfect the wound -- not for
sexual reasons. Most mohels no longer do this." Andrew E. Mathis, Ph.D. 9
August 2000
<END>
http://www.torahcc.org/mishna/23-1-00/friday.htm
Torah Community Connection
Misha Yomit Program
Week 9 - Friday - 28 Jan. 2000
{...]
SHABBAT: CHAPTER 19: MISHNA 2
One may do all the needs of circumcision on Shabbat: one may circumcise, and
tear, and suck, and put on it a bandage and cumin. If he did not grind before
Shabbat, he may chew with his teeth and he may put. If he did not mix wine and
oil before Shabbat, he may put this by itself and this by itself...
Kehati
This mishnah lists the needs of circumcision which may be performed on Shabbat.
One may do all the needs of circumcision on Shabbat: one may circumcise -
circumcising and cutting the foreskin, and tear - the thin membrane under the
foreskin, which the mohel tears to reveal the corona, and suck - out a small
quantity of blood to cleanse the wound and put on it a bandage and cumin - a
type of plant, used for medicinal purposes.
<END>
Need I say more?
Doc Tavish
---
"We are not allowed to drink any wine or grape juice, or any drink containing
wine or grape juice, which has been touched by a non-Jew after the seal of the
bottle has been opened." <http://www.kashrus.org/kosher/supervis.html>
Information taken from: Is it Kosher, Rabbi E. Eidlitz and Spice and Spirit,
The Lubavitch Women's Cookbook Publications (July 12, 2001)
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." Jewish Talmud
<END>
Special note March 15, 2003: I challenge any Rabbi or any defender of Pharisaic
Teachings of Men to show just one scripture in the Pentateuch, Old Testament,
Torah or whatever you may wish to call The Law of Moses and other historical
writings of the history of Jews as contained in the Bible in which a bizarre and
perverted form of circumcision was commanded by God. It is only in the Talmud
authored by Pharisaic sages or scribes such a perversion is commanded.
<STOP>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For the record is what I challenged what you are really miffed about instead of
me quoting Jewish sources? Are you up to the challenge?
Care to tackle this:
Special note March 15, 2003: I challenge any Rabbi or any defender of Pharisaic
Teachings of Men to show just one scripture in the Pentateuch, Old Testament,
Torah or whatever you may wish to call The Law of Moses and other historical
writings of the history of Jews as contained in the Bible in which a bizarre and
perverted form of circumcision was commanded by God. It is only in the Talmud
authored by Pharisaic sages or scribes such a perversion is commanded.
The very first mention of circumcision in Biblical texts is:
Genesis 17:
9 Then God said to Abraham, "As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your
descendants after you for the generations to come.
10 This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you
are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised.
11 You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant
between me and you.
<<Notice no mention of "sucking the wound" is mentioned.>>
Exodus 4
24 At a lodging place on the way, the LORD met {Moses} [1] and was about to kill
him.
25 But Zipporah took a flint knife, cut off her son's foreskin and touched
{Moses'} feet with it. "Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me," she said.
26 So the LORD let him alone. (At that time she said "bridegroom of blood,"
referring to circumcision.)
Joshua 5
2 At that time the LORD said to Joshua, "Make flint knives and circumcise the
Israelites again."
3 So Joshua made flint knives and circumcised the Israelites at Gibeath
Haaraloth.
NO MENTION IS MADE ABOUT "SUCKING THE WOUND"!!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Roman Catholicism has taken considerable heat for its tolerating pedophile
priests and rightfully so BUT why should Talmudic Judaism get a free ride when
it teaches (and allows) for any and all Rabbis to do such to infant male penises
after circumcision when NOTHING in the Law of Moses commands such?
If you take issue with what I post then prove it wrong rather than trying to
wield the club of labeling me anti-Semite because I bring out cold hard facts.
>You know, Mr. Bradbury, I had almost believed you were a human being.
>
>I'm sorry to say, you're still the vile slug you always were.
Personal attacks and smear is all your team has when it comes to refuting cold
hard facts!
Here is another perverted deviation from the Law of Moses and no one has denied
the existence of the Talmudic text cited:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=e37fdtoe5iubsad7h9se3avk00cubg6gd7%404ax.com&rnum=2
Subject: Bestiality and the Jewish Talmud - Doc Tavish Battles it Out With Two
Neo-Pharisees
Message-ID: <e37fdtoe5iubsad7h...@4ax.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2001 00:48:27 GMT
On Mon, 12 Feb 2001 00:11:34 GMT, dr_ni...@my-deja.com wrote:
>In article <7Iuh6.249096$j6.34...@news1.rdc1.va.home.com>,
> "Mark Sherwin" <Sata...@home.com> wrote:
^^^^^^^^
Your e-mail address tells a lot about you Mark. Are you a son of the
father of lies?
>> If some inbred racist, makes a false statement, and uses some quotes
>> from the bible, are all dog-fuckers like you of the same mind?
>>
>> I would like you to answer me that one.
Is personal attack all you lefties have?
>LOL.... tell him about the dog fuckers in the Talmud and let him digest
>the passage about dog shit being a Talmudic medicine.
I know in the book of Gittin there are "medicinal cures" involving the
ingestion of feces from a white dog but here is a real classic and notice
that my opposition did not deny the text I quoted existed!
<START>
On Jewish teachings concerning dogs and women (also notice not once has
any Jew denied these teachings or debates or whatever are in the Talmud!)
On Mon, 08 Jan 2001 19:44:52 GMT, Roving Fruitcake
<roving_f...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In article <582k5t42f1kn1bfjt...@4ax.com>,
> doc_tavi...@my-deja.com wrote:
>> I just showed what the Talmud said!
:
>No, that's your interpretation of what it says.
It is NOT my interpretation fruitcake! I interpreted nothing!
What I posted was how it appears in the Talmud.
>> >Roving Fruitcake
:
>> You chose quite an appropriate name for yourself but all joking
>> aside-- I answer you quite well below!
:
>I beg to differ. I understand the Talmud to be a commentary and series
>of rulings on Jewish religious law - I'd imagine someone would come up
>with hypothetical situations to discuss a particular point.
I can't imagine too many NORMAL people postulating over dogs having sex
with their womenfolk and the availability of womenfolk after the dogs of
the town have had their run!
>> The Talmud discusses Jewish women having sex with dogs as shown here:
:
>What you quote also mentions women having sex with men
I don't recall the text mentioning the women having sex with men.
>- in short, it's describing whether a woman is considered chaste -
Most NORMAL people think of being chaste relates to humans with humans!
>the sections about dogs strike me as hypothetical situations
What NORMAL people would delve into such hypothetical situations?
>rather than describing practises or advocating women having sex with dogs.
I won't say the Talmud advocates having sex with dogs BUT it certainly
condones and makes allowance for it!
Excuse me because I must show the text again for archival sake.
<start>
What the Talmud is:
The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia (1943 edition, page 474] says: "The
Jewish religion as it is today traces its descent, without a break,
through all the centuries, from the Pharisees. Their leading ideas and
methods found expression in a literature of enormous extent, of which a
very great deal is still in existence. The Talmud is the largest and most
important single member of that literature, and round it are gathered a
number of Midrashim, partly legal (Halachic) and partly works of
edification (Haggadic)."
[NOTE: The words in parenthesis are as they appeared in the text; they are
not my additions. Doc Tavish]
".... any decision regarding the Jewish religion must be based on the
TALMUD as the final resume...." "The JEWS - Their History, Culture, and
Religion", Vol. 4, p. 1332, Jewish Publication Society of America
"The TALMUD is to this day the circulating heart's blood of the Jewish
religion. Whatever laws, customs or ceremonies we observe- whether we are
Orthodox, Conservative, Reform or merely spasmodic
sentimentalists-we follow the TALMUD. It is our common law." THE TALMUD;
HEART'S BLOOD of the JEWISH FAITH by Herman Wouk which also ran serially
in the (11/17/59) New York Herald Tribune
---------------------------------------------
The Talmud Elaborating on Women Having Sex With Dogs:
The Babylonian Talmud
Translated into English by Rabbi Dr. I. Epstein
London
The Soncino Press 1935
From the Talmud Volume Yebamoth:
<Yebamoth 59a pages 150 &151 of above volume>
Rabbi Eleazar having stated that an unmarried man who cohabited with
unmarried woman with no matrimonial intention renders her thereby a
harlot! {11} Rabbi Joseph replied: {12} When for instance, the woman was
subjected to intercourse with a beast, where the reason of
'previous carnal intercourse' may be applied but not that of harlot. {13}
Said Abaye to him: Whatever you prefer [your reply cannot be upheld]. If
she is a beulah {14} she must also be a harlot; and if she is not a harlot
{15} she cannot be a beulah either! And were you to reply: This case is
similar to that of a wounded woman, {16} [it may be pointed out] that if
[the disqualification should be extended to] unnatural intercourse also,
{17} you will find no woman eligible to marry a [High Priest [since there
is not one] who has not been in some way (end of page 396 flipping to page
397 to continue) wounded {1} by a splinter! No, said Rabbi Zera, {2} in
respect of a minor who made a declaration of refusal. {3}
Rabbi Shimi b. Hiyya stated: A woman who had intercourse with
a beast is eligible to marry a priest. {4} Likewise it was taught: A woman
who had intercourse with that which is no human being, {5} though she is
in consequence subject to the penalty of stoning, {6} is nevertheless
permitted to marry a priest. {7}
When Rabbi Dimi came {8} he related: It once happened at
Haitalu {9} that while a young woman was sweeping the floor {10} a village
dog {11} covered her from the rear {12} and Rabbi permitted her to marry a
priest. Samuel said: Even a High Priest.
Footnotes for page 396:
{11} Infra 61b, 76a, Sanh. 51a, Tem. 30a
{12} Rab's reason of 'previous carnal intercourse' was necessary. {13} A
term which is not applicable to bestial intercourse. V. infra {14} one who
had experienced carnal intercourse.
{15} Presumably because her act cannot be regarded as 'sexual
intercourse'
{16} V. supra p. 394, n. 8 As in her case marriage with a High Priest is
forbidden (v. our Mishna), though she is no harlot, so also in the case of
bestial intercourse.
{17} I.e., if injury to the anus is to be subject to the same
restrictions as injury to the hymen.
Footnotes for page 397:
{1} Cf. supra p. 394, n. 8
{2} Rab's reason of 'previous carnal intercourse' was necessary. {3}
Mema'meth, v. Glos. Unnatural intercourse with her by her husband places
the minor in the status of beu'lah (v. Glos) but not in that of harlot,
while her refusal to live with him does not give her status of divorcee or
widow but that of mema'meth. Hence the necessity for Rab's statement that
such a minor also is forbidden to marry a High Priest. {4} Even a High
Priest. The result of such intercourse being regarded as a mere wound, and
the opinion that does not so regard such an accidentally damaged hymen as
a disqualification does not so regard such an intercourse either. {5} A
beast
{6} If the offence was committed in the presence of witness after due
warning.
{7} In the absence of witnesses and warning.
{8} From Palestine to Babylon.
{9} [Babylonian form for Aitalu, modern Aiterun N.W. of Kadesh, v. S.
Klein, Beitrage p. 47].
{10} Lit., 'house'
{11} Or 'big hunting dog (Rashi), 'ferocious dog' (Jast.) 'small wild dog
(Aruk).
{12} A case of unnatural intercourse.
<end>
The final line about the condition of the Talmudic Jew is best stated as:
" ...it may be pointed out that if the disqualification should be extended
to unnatural intercourse also, you will find no woman eligible to marry a
High Priest since there is not one who has not been in some way wounded by
a splinter.... A woman who had intercourse with a beast is eligible to
marry a priest.
Likewise it was taught: A woman who had intercourse with that which is no
human being, though she is in consequence subject to the penalty of
stoning, is nevertheless permitted to marry a priest." [From above Talmud
"lesson"]
Doc Tavish
<stop>
Here is another person trying to discount the texts:
Subject: Pharisaic Interpretation of Talmud Lesson -- Animal Sex and Dogs
Date: 11/11/2000
Author: Doc Tavish <doc_tavi...@scottsmail.com>
Original subject title: Re: Talmud Lesson for Ken McVay: Animal Sex, and
Dogs [Dedicated to Nizkor]
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=&selm=fcLT3.2010%24w9.229032%40news.flash.net
Message-ID: <fcLT3.2010$w9.2...@news.flash.net>
On 3-Nov-1999, "Reuven Singer" <reuv...@netmedia.co.il> wrote:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=7vpp81%246dc%241%40news.netvision.net.il&rnum=1
Message-ID: <7vpp81$6dc$1...@news.netvision.net.il>
> Replying to a Tavish nazi post is usually an exercise in futility but for
> the benefit of innocent readers, it should be pointed out that the Talmud is
> a vast compendium of discussion of laws- but is not a lawbook in itself.
> The case Tavish cites- completely misunderstanding the point- deals with a
> largely hypothetical discussion as to whether bestiality affects a woman's
> status as a virgin since the High Priest (at the time of the Temple) is
> forbidden to marry a woman who is not a virgin. One cannot conclude that
> bestiality was or is particularly common- although it is certainly a known
> phenomenon in every community.
Bestiality must have been rampant for the Talmud to say precisely: "....it
may be pointed out that if the disqualification should be extended to
unnatural intercourse also, you will find no woman eligible to marry a
High Priest..."
I notice that you did not once deny the validity of the Talmudic texts-
you only deny how they are "interpreted."
> The Talmud often deals with issues that are purely theoretical -at least
> at the time. For example there is a halachic discussion on flying towers
> in the Talmud, which seems more relevant now than at the time it was written.
> As such the discussion on bestiality is a rather straightforward and
> legalistic and Tavish's leers simply reveal his own sexual hangups.
Don't try to pass off Jewish perversity on me. I did NOT write the Talmud-
your kind did and this is precisely why Jesus taunted your forefathers
daily at the temple on account of their vain reasonings and teachings!
Need I say more?
Doc Tavish
~~End of GOOGLE Archive~~
Although the Pharisaic Talmud condones bestiality the Law of Moses does not and
the Law of Moses as received from G-d at Mount Sinai prescribes the death
penalty for bestiality as this scripture proves:
Exodus 22:
19 "Anyone who has sexual relations with an animal must be put to death.
Leviticus 20:15
" 'If a man has sexual relations with an animal, he must be put to death, and
you must kill the animal.
Leviticus 20:16
" 'If a woman approaches an animal to have sexual relations with it, kill both
the woman and the animal. They must be put to death; their blood will be on
their own heads.
The Law of Moses differs greatly from what the Talmudic Pharisees teach in their
tradition and is it any wonder Jesus said this concerning them?
Matthew 15:
1 Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and
asked,
2 "Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don't wash
their hands before they eat!"
3 Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your
tradition?
4 For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father
or mother must be put to death.'
5 But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, 'Whatever help you
might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,'
6 he is not to 'honor his father' with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for
the sake of your tradition.
7 You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:
8" 'These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
9They worship me in vain;
their teachings are but rules taught by men.'"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I now address the following to primarily those people who claim to be Christian:
Many of you have been indoctrinated into believing the Bible teaches a
"Judeo-Cristian Alliance" BUT that is simply not true! I challenge anyone to
show scripture which would prove First Century Christians had an alliance with
the precepts of Judaism which to this day denies the Messiah came.
ADMONITION TO CHRISTIANS:
If you think that it is God's will to have a partnership with Judaism while
embracing Christianity then consider:
1 John 2: 18 "Young children, it is the last hour, and, just as you have heard
that antichrist is coming, even now there have come to be many antichrists."
1 John 2: 22,23 "Who is the liar if it is not the one that denies that Jesus is
the Christ [or Messiah]? These things I write you about those who are trying to
mislead you!"
1 John 4: 2,3 "You gain knowledge of the inspired expression from God by this:
Every inspired expression that confesses Jesus Christ as having come in the
flesh originates with God, but every inspired expression that does not confess
Jesus does not originate with God, Furthermore this is the antichrist's inspired
expression which you have heard was coming, and now it is already in the world."
2 John 7,10,11 "For many deceivers have gone forth into the world, persons not
confessing Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the
antichrist. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, never
receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him. For he that says a
greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works."
That last sentence which says: "For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer
in his wicked works." is pretty strong advice!
There can be NO Judeo-Christian Alliance because the scripture is quite plain on
telling one and all that the New Covenant COMPLETELY replaces the Old Covenant
as shown in these two archives:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=4ec17voucam2q39154je59emp6hei6mrmf%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Old Covenant Vs New -- New Covenant Replaces Old Covenant aka Jews NO
Longer God's Chosen People So Says the Scripture! R_0313
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 10:38:59 -0600
Message-ID: <4ec17voucam2q3915...@4ax.com>
AND
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=8spror01p27%40news2.newsguy.com&rnum=2&filter=0
"G-d's Will - Jews No Longer OWN The Land Israel"
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 16:27:25 GMT
Message-ID: <8spro...@news2.newsguy.com>
These three archives should prove no Judeo-Christian Alliance existed in the
First Century because Pharisaic Jews were busy persecuting Christians:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=81fu5v31jep%40news1.newsguy.com&rnum=3
"The Most Heinous Murder Plot Ever Devised"
Date: 1999/11/24
Message-ID: <81fu5...@news1.newsguy.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=8jh0rq016j4%40news2.newsguy.com&rnum=6
"Babylon the Great - Religious Persecution, Torture, Harassment"
Date: 2000/06/30
Message-ID: <8jh0r...@news2.newsguy.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=8c12nq0ado%40news1.newsguy.com&rnum=9
"The Apostle Paul on Judaized Jews"
Date: 2000/03/31
Message-ID: <8c12n...@news1.newsguy.com>
I now ask-- How could have a false doctrine of a Judeo-Christian Alliance have
come into existence? It came long after the bible writers died and it is a
doctrine of apostates who embrace anti-christs and their teachings.
Here is the line of persecution down to this day by the very descendants of the
Pharisees and their adherents:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=o8knssko8ffljtgji4hda6j7969vrejovg%404ax.com&rnum=4
"Jews Attack Jesus Again!"
Message-ID: <o8knssko8ffljtgji...@4ax.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 03:10:14 GMT
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=JmJr5.2303%24qO1.202022%40news.flash.net&rnum=1
"ADL Welcomes Decision Barring Bible Story in Elementary School Class (IN THEIR
OWN VILE WORDS!)"
Message-ID: <JmJr5.2303$qO1.2...@news.flash.net>
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 08:00:41 GMT
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=d537tsk1kjrdqoq0f3tg53tkr04np1dmjt%404ax.com&rnum=1
"The Grinches Who Would Steal Christmas..."
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 13:26:44 -0500
Message-ID: <d537tsk1kjrdqoq0f...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=8gesph02jrc%40news2.newsguy.com&rnum=1
"Evangelism Threatened In Israel <<2>>"
Date: 2000/05/23
Message-ID: <8gesp...@news2.newsguy.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=8e0g8c05v7%40news1.newsguy.com&rnum=1
"Spoken as a True Neo-Pharisee --Second Edition"
Date: 2000/04/24
Message-ID: <8e0g8...@news1.newsguy.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=3c2ced84.438864710%40tavish-central&rnum=3
"More Assault by Jews Against Christian Symbols - Crosses"
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 22:09:16 GMT
Message-ID: <3c2ced84.438864710@tavish-central>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=3c2fce04.77126066%40tavish-central&rnum=2
"It Was Jews That Pushed to Have Crosses Removed From Florida
Roadsides! Jews Object to Christian Symbols!"
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 02:32:58 GMT
Message-ID: <3c2fce04.77126066@tavish-central>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=3968527b.66591092%40news.newsguy.com&rnum=1
"Defiling Christian Crosses and Having Them Removed aka Israel
Shahak Details Talmudic Hatred Toward Christianity"
Date: 2000/07/09
Message-ID: <3968527b...@news.newsguy.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=89i8sb0lhr%40news2.newsguy.com&rnum=1
"Attn Christians - Jewish Talmud on Jesus Christ & Deceased
Christians"
Date: 2000/03/01
Message-ID: <89i8s...@news2.newsguy.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=8cud6102jpb%40news2.newsguy.com&rnum=9&filter=0
"Christians Are Idol Worshippers? So Sayeth the Jews (Revised
and Appended) MUST READ!"
Date: 2000/04/11
Message-ID: <8cud6...@news2.newsguy.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=8qn2hs02fp6%40news1.newsguy.com&rnum=4
"What Jews Teach About non-Jews and Their Souls (In Their Own Words) R 2"
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 08:32:45 GMT
Message-ID: <8qn2h...@news1.newsguy.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=v9hc9tgpqof7hp3plo048q2bg30bj56irq%404ax.com&rnum=4
"What Jews Teach About non-Jews and Wine (In Their Own Words) R 2"
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 05:13:05 -0600
Message-ID: <v9hc9tgpqof7hp3pl...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=qr4p4usmhhkrbkltd509n7ic5rtmctc5d1%404ax.com&rnum=3
"L'Chaim Weekly - Shemot 1999-01-04 (In Their Very Own Words) Jewish Bigotry
Toward Non-Jews..."
Message-ID: <qr4p4usmhhkrbkltd...@4ax.com>
Date: 21 Jan 2002 22:22:37 GMT
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=8qld8n012vd%40news1.newsguy.com&rnum=1
"How Jewish Teachings Imply that non-Jews are Defiled or Unclean (their Own
Words and Teachings.."
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 17:23:17 GMT
Message-ID: <8qld8...@news1.newsguy.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=8nv2ma01aa%40news1.newsguy.com&rnum=1
"Want to See Bigotry At Its Most Extreme? Visit Jewish Chabad's Search Engine
and Do Some Exploring!"
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 23:35:37 GMT
Message-ID: <8nv2m...@news1.newsguy.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=39bf0ead.12838098%40news.newsguy.com&rnum=1
"MUST READ...Genocide and Forced Labor (Original Creators Established Within)
Waged Against Gentiles"
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 05:35:46 GMT
Message-ID: <39bf0ead...@news.newsguy.com>
The above links represent many hours of study and research. What I post is
factual and in most cases what Jews themselves teach. I invite one and all to
carefully read all of the material I provided and then make up their own minds.
>Sara
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=&selm=prbo5vkp1825141dem99scia1676el7nqd%404ax.com
Subject: Anti-American Communist Agitator and Tax Exempt Religious Org (B'nai
Brith) Which Gave Him Financial and Moral Support
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:07:42 -0600
Message-ID: <prbo5vkp1825141de...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=vd01cvsh9ta3ep7b3crfru9ce2rb0snnls%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Children of the Devil and Anti-Christ[s] Positively Identified Using
Scripture-- Check The Proofs For Yourselves! V2.0
Message-ID: <vd01cvsh9ta3ep7b3...@4ax.com>
Date: 13 May 2003 05:29:00 GMT
Jewish Led Bolsheviks Scalped & Crucified Christians by Philippa Fletcher
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=34c17d0f.1410012285%40news.smart1.net&rnum=7
Subject: Bolsheviks Scalped and Crucified Christians -
Date: 1998/01/18
Message-ID: <34c17d0f....@news.smart1.net>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=cqrhav0th39prr3bf5am4dnkcn89j52p8b%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Post-Soviet Religion (What Communists did to Christians) R_0425
Date: 25 Apr 2003 08:14:41 GMT
Message-ID: <cqrhav0th39prr3bf...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=ek19cv4ei9cf2nrvull7df5rgn2rhai54c%404ax.com&rnum=2
Subject: Soviets (Communists) Were Jews as Proven by BOOLEAN Operands (Classic
Repost from 3-31-2000) Abridged Version R_0516
Message-ID: <ek19cv4ei9cf2nrvu...@4ax.com>
Date: 16 May 2003 06:36:09 GMT
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>