Replies

Thank you for directing me to your post from the American Jewish Committee. Now I am completely clear where you are coming from. YOUR SOURCES ABOUT THE TALMUD ARE WRONG. You know that you haven't read the Talmud and have no idea what you are talking about. You have found some sources on the internet which perpetuate some complete fallacies which some people started in a sad attempt to find support for Christianity through Jewish sources. Why is that necessary for you? I don't need to disassemble other religions in order to know the Torah is G-d's law. G-d's Word is loud and clear. And if you wanted the Talmud to support the Christian Bible, don't you find it odd that there is hardly any mention of anyone named Yeshu, and the mentions that exist are probably of at least two different people, who lived a hundred or more years earlier than Jesus? I notice that someone posted a link that might have helped you on your AJC post, but I guess you ignored it: http://talmud.faithweb.com/ And why not type in Sanhedrin 107b into Google and see how different the Jewish websites are from the Christian ones. That should be a clue to you that there is some total misrepresentation of the Talmud going on by people who cannot read the Aramaic and haven't any idea what it actually says. Please see also http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=8530 which refutes the AJC article.

About.com is yet another lame website and is no more authoritative than wikipedia in that people can post what they want. None of what is written in your link is true. Sorry. If you are really interested in what Jews believe, why not sit down with an Orthodox rabbi and talk it over, and look directly at some sources, rather than trying to piece together something that makes you feel good on the internet?

You still haven't denounced the forced conversions of the Inquisiton, and you ignored my question about Abdul Rahman. Wonder why. Actually, I don't. You have dragged in a lot of extraneous and erroneous material to make your case and when all is said and done, you seem to be defending the Inquisition, and perhaps the Crusades as well. That's unfortunate, because American Christians have no part in such history and have always demonstrated beautiful religious tolerance. Give it a try. Until you state that the Inquisition was completely and horribly wrong and that forcing Jews to choose conversion or death was a disgusting low point in the Catholic church, and until you state that the muslims would be wrong to put Rahman to death for converting to Christianity, I'm done writing to you.

Thank you for directing me to your post from the American Jewish Committee. Now I am completely clear where you are coming from. YOUR SOURCES ABOUT THE TALMUD ARE WRONG.

The American Jewish Committee is ignorant of Judaism and its sources?

You know that you haven't read the Talmud and have no idea what you are talking about.

So the hours I spent in the University of Delaware-Newark Library reading the Steinsaltz edition of the Talmud were all in my imagination?

That should be a clue to you that there is some total misrepresentation of the Talmud going on by people who cannot read the Aramaic and haven't any idea what it actually says.

Many more Christians speak Aramaic than do Jews. It is the native language of the Assyrian Christians, and the liturgical language of the Maronites, Syrians, and Indians.

Please see also http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=8530 which refutes the AJC article.

I don't see it refuting that at all. All it does is highlight speculative disputes by modern sophists, and notes that many in the past and today agree with Bayme's interpretation.

You still haven't denounced the forced conversions of the Inquisiton

I can't denounce what never happened. That would be lying. The Inquisition did not forcibly convert anyone. It prosecuted heretics and urged their repentance.

and you ignored my question about Abdul Rahman.

Sorry, I forgot. My brother Abdul will be a glorious martyr for the faith. I hope he goes as glady and joyously to death at the hands of the infidels as did St. Stephen at the hands of the faithless of Israel. A crown awaits those who suffer death for the name of Christ. "This day thou shalt be with me in paradise." Does that answer your question?

Blessed are ye when they shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake: Be glad and rejoice for your reward is very great in heaven. For so they persecuted the prophets that were before you. (St. Matthew 5.11-12)

You have dragged in a lot of extraneous and erroneous material to make your case and when all is said and done, you seem to be defending the Inquisition, and perhaps the Crusades as well.

Seem to be? I thought I was doing so pretty vigorously.

That's unfortunate, because American Christians have no part in such history

and have always demonstrated beautiful religious tolerance.

A reminder of Beautiful American Religious Tolerance (TM) is shown to me every day when I pass by the Cathedral of Sts. Peter and Paul in Philadelphia. It has no stained glass windows on its lower level, because anti-Catholic rioters would have smashed them. Beautiful American Religious Tolerance (TM) begins and ends with individualistic Protestant interpretation of scriptures and religion. God help the man who professes the faith once delivered to the Saints in this land.

Until you state that the Inquisition was completely and horribly wrong

I rather like the Inqusition.

and that forcing Jews to choose conversion or death was a disgusting low point in the Catholic church,

You'd have to give more specific examples than these sort of generalizations for me to condemn it. I'm opposed to forcible conversion, but am aware of very few instances of "baptism or death" as the only two options, the primary one being the Saxon Slaughter of Charlemagne.

and until you state that the muslims would be wrong to put Rahman to death for converting to Christianity

Of course they are wrong, but he knew what he was getting into when he embraced the Cross in a hostile land. Any Christian who is unwilling to suffer death for the sake of Christ is unworthy of Christ and His grace. Rahman will be a powerful example of grace and a great intercessor for the salvation of the Mohammedans if he holds up to the Muslim persecution and allows himself to be martyred.

At Damascus, St. Peter Mavimenus, who was killed by some Arabs who visited him in his sickness, because he said to them: "Whoever does not embrace the Christian and Catholic faith is lost, like your false prophet Mohammed." (Roman Martyrology, February 21)