[kosta50]

This isn't because of anything that was in the bible or God's law. There is no such injunction in scripture. The problem was that the jews of the time ADDED to scripture. This is why I keep saying that you confuse scripture with Jewish tradition

The Jewish Law or Halacha is derived from the Scripture (Torah), based on long and exhaustive rabbinical interpretations of God's laws. Mom already explained why it is impossible to make oneself righteous by the law -- for to do so one has to obey it perfectly and no one, given our nature, can do it.

Ruth is not a good example of how Judaism views the Gentiles. After all, Ruth did become Jewish. But there were no attempts to teach the Gentiles about God; Judaism does not know proselytism. So, without Christianity, the God of Abraham would have remained known to the Jews, whatever their numbers. That the God of Abraham is known to and worshipped by billions of people today is the work of Gentiles, not Jews.

Now, as far as Halacha is concerned, the Jewish Law is not always very kind towards the non-Jews. Using Jewish sources and not various hate groups that litter the Internet, it is important to understand that Halacha is part of the Talmud and that it has evolved from about 200 AD and for the past 1800 or so years. As such, many of the Halachic pronouncements must be understood in the historical and cultural context and not as isolated phrases, but they nevertheless act as guidelines taught by people of influence. Let's look at some of them:

• Jew who murders a Gentile is not punishable by death in the human courts. According to some opinions he is not punishable at all by the human courts. But a Gentile who kills a Jew, purely by accident and unintentionally, must be put to death.
• Laws in regard to murder, which clearly state that there is Halachic difference between murder of a Jew and of a Gentile (the latter is considered a far less severe crime).
• A ban on desecrating the Sabbath to save the life of a Gentile.
• A Jew's exemption from liability if his property (e. g. ox) causes damage to a Gentile's property. But if a Gentile's property causes damage to a Jew's property, the Gentile is liable.
• The question of whether robbery of a Gentile is forbidden by the Torah's law or only by a Rabbinic decree.
• A ban on returning a lost item to a Gentile if the reason for returning it is one's sympathy towards the Gentile and compassion for him.
• The sum which a Gentile overpays in a business transaction due to his own error is forfeit; whether a Jew is permitted to intentionally deceive a Gentile is also discussed.
• One who kidnaps a Jew is liable to death, but one who kidnaps a Gentile is exempt.
• A Jew who hurts or injures a Gentile is not liable for compensation of damage, but a Gentile who hurts a Jew is liable to death.
• One who overcharges a Gentile ought not return him the sum that the Gentile overpaid.
• A Gentile -- or even a convert to Judaism -- may not be appointed king or public official of any sort (e. g. a cabinet minister).
• One who defames a female proselyte (claiming that she was not virgin at the time of her marriage) is liable to neither lashes nor fine.
• The prohibition to hate applies only to Jews; one may hate a Gentile.
• One may take revenge against or bear a grudge towards Gentiles; likewise, the commandment "love your neighbor" applies only to Jews, not to Gentiles.
• One who sees Gentile graveyards should curse: "Your mother shall be greatly ashamed..."
• Gentiles are likened to animals.
• If an ox damaged a Gentile maidservant, it should be considered as though the ox damaged a she-ass.
• The dead body of a Gentile does not bear ritual impurity, nor does a Gentile who touches the dead body of a Jew become impure -- he is considered like an animal who touched a dead body.
• One is forbidden to pour anointing oil on a Jew, but there is no ban on pouring that oil on a Gentile because Gentiles are likened to animals.
• An animal slaughtered by a Gentile is forbidden, even if the ritual slaughter performed was technically correct, because Gentiles are deemed like animals. (Daat Emet does not agree that this is the Halachic reason for invalidating a Gentile's ritual slaughter -- but this is not the place to delve into the subject).
• Their members are like those of asses" -- Gentiles are likened to animals.
• There are Jews (who are referred to as 'men') and gentiles.

I highly recommend that the reader also use the link included and read rabbinical explanations and opinions on these issues before passing any judgments, but the very fact that such issues exist is significant. Hate and intolerance is a human quality -- passions that lead to the death of the soul, which is why all humanity is in need of salvation.

[RnMomof7]

I have studied some of the jewish law as it related to some NT events to clarify some of the events.

excellent post

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Time to set the "Halachic" expert straight. Torah is binding. Interpretations of Torah are not. You take one interpretation of "Talmud" and impune all of Judaism. The Talmud is the Babylonian and Jerusalem Mishnahs along with Gemara (interpretations of Mishna). Newsflash: These interpretations do not have to agree. Nor do the interpretations of the interpretations. Such as the many writings of interpretations post-Talmud; Maimonides' Mishnah Torah, Shulchan Aruch, Midrash, Zohar, Siddur, Machzor, Haggadah, and the many written Responsa liturature. You don't just take a certain Jewish writing and call it "Halachic". What's "Halachic" for one, isn't necessarily "Halachic" for another.

[1 spark]

RE:"Mom already explained why it is impossible to make oneself righteous by the law -- for to do so one has to obey it perfectly and no one, given our nature, can do it."

Same old blather that Constantinian Church teaches...which is NOT consistent with the OT and the message of Jesus. The OT and Jesus repeatedly tell us to be right with God, we must REPENT. Repentance, and following God's law makes us right with God. It's plain, simple, and easy to understand. No mystery.

RE: Judaism does not know proselytism.

Are you serious? Number one, Jews don't feel the need to proselytize because they believe the good of all nations are favored by God (perhaps a safe excuse (?) considering their history of persecution, suffering, and genocide) . Number 2...looking all the way back to the early Constantinian church, when do you suggest might have been an opportune ("safe") time for them to ATTEMPT to proselytize (had they believed it to be right) ...during the crusades perhaps...or maybe in the early 1940's? C'mon Kosta, you can't be serious.

I'm not sure what your motive is in listing the "Halachic pronouncements". This is unfamiliar territory to me...so difficult to comment on it. Interesting though, that you bring up some "pronouncements" that acted as "guidelines taught by people of influence", yet.... you, IMO, seem indifferent/defensive to the systematic persecution perpetrated on the Jews. In the grand scheme of things, those "words" are but a speck of dust on the ass of an elephant. You shall know them by their fruits.

Hate and intolerance is a human quality -- passions that lead to the death of the soul, which is why all humanity is in need of salvation.

Hate and intolerance is a human quality -- passions that lead to the death of the soul, which is why all humanity is in need of REPENTANCE.

[DouglasKC]

The Jewish Law or Halacha is derived from the Scripture (Torah), based on long and exhaustive rabbinical interpretations of God's laws. Mom already explained why it is impossible to make oneself righteous by the law -- for to do so one has to obey it perfectly and no one, given our nature, can do it.

I have no idea what you're talking about or why you've gone into a whole explanation about what some Jews believe. I've been trying to tell you that some Jews, and especially the Jews of Christ's time DID NOT interpret scripture correctly. They added their own laws and regulations. You're answer seems to be that they "based" them on scripture so scripture must be wrong. Well Christianity is also based on the same scripture so must it also be wrong?