ruveyn wrote:
0_equals_true wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
What you Pagans call the Old Testament and what is the Only Testament for Jews was mostly written by Rabbis and Sages. It is a man-made product. Never the less the ethical system embodied by the Jewish doctrines, both the written Torah and the oral Torah has evolved into the gold standard for human ethics.
Muslims are beyond the pale of decency and reason. Christians still stumble and groan under the load of spirit-killing altruism. If Jesus could see this he would turn in his grave.
ruveyn
Gold standard of ethics?
You could say that Mohamed was inspired by the violence, vitriol and vengeance in the old testament, the primary source of inspiration. You could sum up how much Christianity inspire Islam in a few paragraphs, and they got most of it wrong.
I'm not arguing that the new testament is a gold standard or a good moral guide, but certainly reformist.
Early Christianity was a reaction against the Old Testament it is a deliberately subversive teaching. and Un-Orthodox Judaism you like. The Jewish Christian were wiped out however
THe bulk of Jewish ethics is NOT biblical. It derives from the Talmudic tradition most of which arose -after- the time of the "prophet" Mohammed (pus and blisters upon him).
You should go back to Maimonodes (circa 1000 c.e) or the Rashi circa (1100) c.e. to see what evolved. Rabbi Karo codified this Talmudic content in his Shulchan Aruch about the time that Colubus sailed the ocean blue.
ruveyn
It's strange how you don't tend to find translations of the Talmud in high street bookstores. I hear it's good for tips on swindling gentiles. It doesn't sound to me like it represents a major departure from the anti-gentilism of the Old Testament.
Regarding Maimonides, I recommend that anyone who is interested take a look at what Israel Shahak had to say about him in his book 'Jewish History, Jewish Religion'.
From page 26:
Quote:
In 1962, a part of the Maimonidean Code referred to above, the so-called Book of Knowledge, which contains the most basic rules of Jewish faith and practice, was published in Jerusalem in a bilingual edition, with the English translation facing the Hebrew text.20 The latter has been restored to its original purity, and the command to exterminate Jewish infidels appears in it in full: 'It is a duty to exterminate them with one's own hands.' In the English translation this is somewhat softened to: 'It is a duty to take active measures to destroy them.' But then the Hebrew text goes on to specify the prime examples of 'infidels' who must be exterminated: 'Such as Jesus of Nazareth and his pupils, and Tzadoq and Baitos 21 and their pupils, may the name of the wicked rot'. Not one 'word of this appears in the English text on the facing page (78a). And, even more significant, in spite of the wide circulation of this book among scholars in the English-speaking countries, not one of them has, as far as I know, protested against this glaring deception.
The second example comes from the USA, again from an English translation of a book by Maimonides. Apart from his work on the codification of the Talmud, he was
also a philosopher and his Guide to the Perplexed is justly considered to be the greatest work of Jewish religious philosophy and is widely read and used even today.
Unfortunately, in addition to his attitude towards non-Jews generally and Christians in particular, Maimonides was also an anti-Black racist. Towards the end of the Guide, in a crucial chapter (book III, chapter 51) he discusses how various sections of humanity can attain the supreme religious value, the true worship of God. Among those who are incapable of even approaching this are:
"Some of the Turks [i.e., the Mongol race] and the nomads in the North, and the Blacks and the nomads in the South, and those who resemble them in our climates. And their nature is like the nature of mute animals, and according to my opinion they are not on the level of human beings, and their level among existing things is below that of a man and above that of a monkey, because they have the image and the resemblance of a man more than a monkey does."
From page 80:
Quote:
According to the Halakhah, the duty to save the life of a fellow Jew is paramount.14 It supersedes all other religious obligations and interdictions, excepting only the prohibitions against the three most heinous sins of adultery (including incest), murder and idolatry.
As for Gentiles, the basic talmudic principle is that their lives must not be saved, although it is also forbidden to murder them outright. The Talmud itself~~ expresses this in the maxim 'Gentiles are neither to be lifted [out of a well] nor hauled down [into it]'. Maimonides16 explains:
"As for Gentiles with whom we are not at war ... their death must not be caused, but it is forbidden to save them if they are at the point of death; if, for example, one of them is seen falling into the sea, he should not be rescued, for it is written: 'neither shalt thou stand against the blood of thy fellow'17 - but [a Gentile] is not thy fellow."
In particular, a Jewish doctor must not treat a Gentile patient. Maimonides - himself an illustrious physician - is quite explicit on this; in another passage18 he repeats the distinction between 'thy fellow' and a Gentile, and concludes: 'and from this learn ye, that it is forbidden to heal a Gentile even for payment...'
However, the refusal of a Jew - particularly a Jewish doctor - to save the life of a Gentile may, if it becomes known, antagonize powerful Gentiles and so put Jews in danger. Where such danger exists, the obligation to avert it supersedes the ban on helping the Gentile. Thus Maimonides continues: ' ... but if you fear him or his hostility, cure him for payment, though you are forbidden to do so without payment.'
26 Mar 2013, 7:59 pm
