Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[rylah]

I'm interested. Let's see what You have to quote....

I have only to quote the prominent Jewish religious authorities on the Talmud, like Ovadia Yosef, Yitzchak Ginsburgh or Moshe ben Maimon (Moses Maimonides).

Shall I do that?

Do what You want, but without context I'm afraid well be tossing water with a fork... You can't expect to grasp it by not ever reading a full chapter...
Each Rebbe You'll present I can present a counterpart in the opposite direction...that's the thing about Talmud You seem to miss. There's a whole system of debates so You can pick anything out of context thinking You know the meaning. That's only the 1st stage- the literal meaning of the word-PSHAT...then we go deeper and deeper using specific tools and systems.

If You want a mature debate or dialogue on a whole series of books that many Law, theology and philosophy systems were based upon, there's no way to oversimplify.

Although Maimonides is considered now a cornerstone, he was debated fiercely during his time. And that's just one example.

Am I clear?
I myself have my problems with Talmud, especially the Babylonian
but in no way I'm gonna oversimplify it to 'debunk' isolated parts of a debate.

If You want You can 'dumb this down' but this way You'll only prove my point.

 

[Phoenall]

I'm interested. Let's see what You have to quote....

I have only to quote the prominent Jewish religious authorities on the Talmud, like Ovadia Yosef, Yitzchak Ginsburgh or Moshe ben Maimon (Moses Maimonides).

Shall I do that?

Then you will be plagiarising and not understanding the content yourself, but just taking the words of another as your own. Same with when you just post C&P as your answers to questions, this shows your lack of understanding and that you just blindly follow the propaganda.

 

[theliq]

The Talmud was written thousands of years ago. The references to non-Jews in it, refer to pagans or idol-worshippers.

Well, Israel Shahak was an Israeli intellectual, who spoke Hebrew and could read not only the Talmud, but also the interpretation of this book by modern Israeli religious scholars.

And Ovadia Yosef, who got the largest funeral in the history of Israel, basically confirmed everything that Israel Shahak was telling us in his books. And Ovadia Yosef was called by many Israeli leading politicians "the greatest Jewish religious teacher".
As we see, Ovadia Yosef was and is a recognized and honored religious authority in Israel.

If you want to have a discussion about Israel Shahak or Ovadia Yosef, then do it.

If you can refute the arguments of Israel Shahak, then I will change my mind.

It is not enough just to call Israel Shahak or your opponentsi n this forum "bad guys" or other silly names, that is not the purprse of any discussion, that is just childish behaviour.

In a discussion forum you have to attack the message, not the messenger.

Do not attack Israel Shahak, attack is arguments! Prove that he was wrong!

Can you get my point?

I'm interested. Let's see what You have to quote, and by the way if we're going to deal with the Talmud, we'd have to deal with whole chapters of DEBATES between generations of community leaders. Not just singe sentences. Mind You Maimonides had to summarize it because Hebrews themselves had difficulty to swallow all the info.
And please specify which Talmud- the Babylonian or from Jerusalem.
Next we'll have to decide on specific interpretation schools and the level of depth were going to dig for- there're 4 stages.

Pick a topic of Your choice.

Considering the Israelites couldn't read or write in Babylon...it must BE SALEM

 

[rylah]

The Talmud was written thousands of years ago. The references to non-Jews in it, refer to pagans or idol-worshippers.

Well, Israel Shahak was an Israeli intellectual, who spoke Hebrew and could read not only the Talmud, but also the interpretation of this book by modern Israeli religious scholars.

And Ovadia Yosef, who got the largest funeral in the history of Israel, basically confirmed everything that Israel Shahak was telling us in his books. And Ovadia Yosef was called by many Israeli leading politicians "the greatest Jewish religious teacher".
As we see, Ovadia Yosef was and is a recognized and honored religious authority in Israel.

If you want to have a discussion about Israel Shahak or Ovadia Yosef, then do it.

If you can refute the arguments of Israel Shahak, then I will change my mind.

It is not enough just to call Israel Shahak or your opponentsi n this forum "bad guys" or other silly names, that is not the purprse of any discussion, that is just childish behaviour.

In a discussion forum you have to attack the message, not the messenger.

Do not attack Israel Shahak, attack is arguments! Prove that he was wrong!

Can you get my point?

I'm interested. Let's see what You have to quote, and by the way if we're going to deal with the Talmud, we'd have to deal with whole chapters of DEBATES between generations of community leaders. Not just singe sentences. Mind You Maimonides had to summarize it because Hebrews themselves had difficulty to swallow all the info.
And please specify which Talmud- the Babylonian or from Jerusalem.
Next we'll have to decide on specific interpretation schools and the level of depth were going to dig for- there're 4 stages.

Pick a topic of Your choice.

Considering the Israelites couldn't read or write in Babylon...it must BE SALEM

Hebrews already read and wrote volumes of books for generations (that later became the basis of many theology, philosophy and law systems among other nations)
before the muslim prophet who COULD NOT read or write, fought the Hebrews for being declined.
They wrote all those while the arabs were still burying their daughters alive in the DESERT and prayed to numerous sky deities in Mecca.

 

[Art__Allm]

Then you will be plagiarising...

No, if you mention the author, then you are just quoting, not plagiarising.
Do you really not know the difference between quoting and plagiarising?
Every educated person should know the difference.

..and not understanding the content yourself, but just taking the words of another as your own.

Well, anybody can use this silly argumentation.
Muslim would say that you do not understand Islam, that you are taking the words out of context, etc.
Communists would say that you do not understand communism, and so on.
Well, I will quote the mentioned Jewish scholars, and you will explain to us what they intended to say.

 

[Phoenall]

Then you will be plagiarising...

No, if you mention the author, then you are just quoting, not plagiarising.
Do you really not know the difference between quoting and plagiarising?
Every educated person should know the difference.

..and not understanding the content yourself, but just taking the words of another as your own.

Well, anybody can use this silly argumentation.
Muslim would say that you do not understand Islam, that you are taking the words out of context, etc.
Communists would say that you do not understand communism, and so on.
Well, I will quote the mentioned Jewish scholars, and you will explain to us what they intended to say.

They do every time they are quoted having made a statement to the effect of KILL THE UNBELIEVERS

No you have to say what you think they are trying to say, and don't forget it has to be in full context

 

[Art__Allm]

They do every time they are quoted having made a statement to the effect of KILL THE UNBELIEVERS

Well, they say that you have to understand this in the historical context.
The "unbelievers" were the pagans who lived 1500 years ago and who wanted to kill the Muslims. That is how most Muslims understand this statement.
The "people of the Book" (Christians and Jews) are Believers.

No you have to say what you think they are trying to say, and don't forget it has to be in full context

Well, I cannot understand the Arabic or Hebrew language, so I have to rely on translation and the opinion of Muslim or Jewish religious scholars.

Can you quote any prominent Muslim scholar, who thinks that Muslims have still to kill the "unbelievers", if these "unbelievers" are no threat to them?

What to Judaism, here a quote:

Yitzchak Ginsburgh (born 14 November 1944) is an American-born Israeli rabbi. He is currently the president of the Od Yosef ChaiYeshivah in the settlement of Yitzhar in the West Bank, and the spiritual leader of the kabbalistic Gal Einai movement.
....
In his writings, Ginzburg gives prominence to Halachic and kabbalistic approaches that emphasize the distinction between Jew and non-Jew (Gentile), imposing a clear separation and hierarchy in this respect. He claims that while the Jews are the Chosen People and were created in God's image, the Gentiles do not have this status.... Ginzburg stated that, on the theoretical level, if a Jew requires a liver transplant to survive, it would be permissible to seize a Gentile and take their liver forcefully.

Yitzchak Ginsburgh - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Do you have any problems to understand this hate speech?
Do you need more quotes from more prominent Jewish religious scholars?

 

[rylah]

They do every time they are quoted having made a statement to the effect of KILL THE UNBELIEVERS

Well, they say that you have to understand this in the historical context.
The "unbelievers" were the pagans who lived 1500 years ago and who wanted to kill the Muslims. That is how most Muslims understand this statement.
The "people of the Book" (Christians and Jews) are Believers.

No you have to say what you think they are trying to say, and don't forget it has to be in full context

Well, I cannot understand the Arabic or Hebrew language, so I have to rely on translation and the opinion of Muslim or Jewish religious scholars.

Can you quote any prominent Muslim scholar, who thinks that Muslims have still to kill the "unbelievers", if these "unbelievers" are no threat to them?

What to Judaism, here a quote:

Yitzchak Ginsburgh (born 14 November 1944) is an American-born Israeli rabbi. He is currently the president of the Od Yosef ChaiYeshivah in the settlement of Yitzhar in the West Bank, and the spiritual leader of the kabbalistic Gal Einai movement.
....
In his writings, Ginzburg gives prominence to Halachic and kabbalistic approaches that emphasize the distinction between Jew and non-Jew (Gentile), imposing a clear separation and hierarchy in this respect. He claims that while the Jews are the Chosen People and were created in God's image, the Gentiles do not have this status.... Ginzburg stated that, on the theoretical level, if a Jew requires a liver transplant to survive, it would be permissible to seize a Gentile and take their liver forcefully.

Yitzchak Ginsburgh - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Do you have any problems to understand this hate speech?
Do you need more quotes from more prominent Jewish religious scholars?

Yes please. And do You want to see luciferian, false messiah followers among what You
call "prominent jewish scholars" of recent times?
You can also find references to these people in Torah (Exodus) and in the Babylonian Talmud.

 

[rylah]

They do every time they are quoted having made a statement to the effect of KILL THE UNBELIEVERS

Well, they say that you have to understand this in the historical context.
The "unbelievers" were the pagans who lived 1500 years ago and who wanted to kill the Muslims. That is how most Muslims understand this statement.
The "people of the Book" (Christians and Jews) are Believers.

No you have to say what you think they are trying to say, and don't forget it has to be in full context

Well, I cannot understand the Arabic or Hebrew language, so I have to rely on translation and the opinion of Muslim or Jewish religious scholars.

Can you quote any prominent Muslim scholar, who thinks that Muslims have still to kill the "unbelievers", if these "unbelievers" are no threat to them?

What to Judaism, here a quote:

Yitzchak Ginsburgh (born 14 November 1944) is an American-born Israeli rabbi. He is currently the president of the Od Yosef ChaiYeshivah in the settlement of Yitzhar in the West Bank, and the spiritual leader of the kabbalistic Gal Einai movement.
....
In his writings, Ginzburg gives prominence to Halachic and kabbalistic approaches that emphasize the distinction between Jew and non-Jew (Gentile), imposing a clear separation and hierarchy in this respect. He claims that while the Jews are the Chosen People and were created in God's image, the Gentiles do not have this status.... Ginzburg stated that, on the theoretical level, if a Jew requires a liver transplant to survive, it would be permissible to seize a Gentile and take their liver forcefully.

Yitzchak Ginsburgh - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Do you have any problems to understand this hate speech?
Do you need more quotes from more prominent Jewish religious scholars?

From the article You've attached:
"The Ashkenazi chief rabbi Avraham Shapira condemned Ginzburg's views, one of the few of the Israeli rabbinate to do so."

Now why one of the few:
Avraham Shapira - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

"Shapira had been the head of the Rabbinical court of Jerusalem, and both a member and the head of the Supreme Rabbinic Court."

See my point?

 

[ForeverYoung436]

The Talmud was written thousands of years ago. The references to non-Jews in it, refer to pagans or idol-worshippers.

Well, Israel Shahak was an Israeli intellectual, who spoke Hebrew and could read not only the Talmud, but also the interpretation of this book by modern Israeli religious scholars.

And Ovadia Yosef, who got the largest funeral in the history of Israel, basically confirmed everything that Israel Shahak was telling us in his books. And Ovadia Yosef was called by many Israeli leading politicians "the greatest Jewish religious teacher".
As we see, Ovadia Yosef was and is a recognized and honored religious authority in Israel.

If you want to have a discussion about Israel Shahak or Ovadia Yosef, then do it.

If you can refute the arguments of Israel Shahak, then I will change my mind.

It is not enough just to call Israel Shahak or your opponentsi n this forum "bad guys" or other silly names, that is not the purprse of any discussion, that is just childish behaviour.

In a discussion forum you have to attack the message, not the messenger.

Do not attack Israel Shahak, attack is arguments! Prove that he was wrong!

Can you get my point?

I'm interested. Let's see what You have to quote, and by the way if we're going to deal with the Talmud, we'd have to deal with whole chapters of DEBATES between generations of community leaders. Not just singe sentences. Mind You Maimonides had to summarize it because Hebrews themselves had difficulty to swallow all the info.
And please specify which Talmud- the Babylonian or from Jerusalem.
Next we'll have to decide on specific interpretation schools and the level of depth were going to dig for- there're 4 stages.

Pick a topic of Your choice.

Considering the Israelites couldn't read or write in Babylon...it must BE SALEM

That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. There was the Babylonian Talmud, for starters.

 

[Phoenall]

Wrong as the koran states the people of the book as being the unbelievers, and this is reinforced in the hadiths when it says "KILL THE JEWS" and "KILL THE CHRISTIANS"


So the best you have is some weird Jewish sect that has only a handful of members, try looking at the words of Abu Hamza, Adnam Choudray, Ayotollah Khomieni, Abu Mazen to name but a few of Islam's religious and political leaders that say " KILL THE JEWS" and " FIRST SATURDAY, THEN SUNDAY"

How about some mainstream Jewish leaders that have made their words official Jewish government policy like the names I gave ?

 

[Mindful]

The Secret Ethnic Cleansing of Palestinians

According to the researcher, many Palestinians captured by Shiite militias in Iraq have been brutally tortured and forced to "confess" to their alleged involvement in terrorism. Since 2003, the number of Palestinians there has dropped from 25,000 to 6,000.

• Most interesting is the complete indifference displayed by international human rights organizations, the media and the Palestinian Authority (PA) toward the mistreatment of Palestinians in Arab countries. International journalists do not care about the Palestinians in the Arab world because this is not a story that can be blamed on Israel.
  
  
• The UN and other international bodies have obviously not heard of the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in the Arab world. They too are so obsessed with Israel that they prefer not to hear about the suffering of Palestinians under Arab regimes.
  
  
• PA leaders say they want to press "war crimes" charges against Israel with the International Criminal Court. However, when it comes to ethnic cleansing and torture of Palestinians in Arab countries such as Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, they choose to look the other way.
  

The Secret Ethnic Cleansing of Palestinians

 

[rylah]

Hamas member:
"We all have ARAB roots,...and every palestinian can prove his ARAB roots-
whether from Saudi Arabia, Yemen or ANYWHERE"

 

[aris2chat]

Hamas member:
"We all have ARAB roots,...and every palestinian can prove his ARAB roots-
whether from Saudi Arabia, Yemen or ANYWHERE"

barf

 

[Friends]

I do not see why anyone who is not a Muslim sides with the Palestinians against the Israelis.

 

[theliq]

I do not see why anyone who is not a Muslim sides with the Palestinians against the Israelis.

Because of the Israelis Banal behaviour towards the Palestinians over the past 60 years or so.......you comment is noted,and your poor excuse of an ingnorant post likewise...you know nothing,not the minute nor the hour.

 

[Phoenall]

I do not see why anyone who is not a Muslim sides with the Palestinians against the Israelis.

Because of the Israelis Banal behaviour towards the Palestinians over the past 60 years or so.......you comment is noted,and your poor excuse of an ingnorant post likewise...you know nothing,not the minute nor the hour.

That you have constantly failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt, and when called on your attempts resort to name calling and personal abuse.

 

[theliq]

I do not see why anyone who is not a Muslim sides with the Palestinians against the Israelis.

Because of the Israelis Banal behaviour towards the Palestinians over the past 60 years or so.......you comment is noted,and your poor excuse of an ingnorant post likewise...you know nothing,not the minute nor the hour.

That you have constantly failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt, and when called on your attempts resort to name calling and personal abuse.

Phoe,As you know I am always correct,why don't you stop supporting and agreeing with.....Fools,Come on.......you do know better,steve..anyway tell me how can the truth be called Name Calling or Abuse

 

[Phoenall]

I do not see why anyone who is not a Muslim sides with the Palestinians against the Israelis.

Because of the Israelis Banal behaviour towards the Palestinians over the past 60 years or so.......you comment is noted,and your poor excuse of an ingnorant post likewise...you know nothing,not the minute nor the hour.

That you have constantly failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt, and when called on your attempts resort to name calling and personal abuse.

Phoe,As you know I am always correct,why don't you stop supporting and agreeing with.....Fools,Come on.......you do know better,steve..anyway tell me how can the truth be called Name Calling or Abuse

What a maroon you are, you are never right because you only use islamonazi sources

 

[Phoenall]

I do not see why anyone who is not a Muslim sides with the Palestinians against the Israelis.

Because of the Israelis Banal behaviour towards the Palestinians over the past 60 years or so.......you comment is noted,and your poor excuse of an ingnorant post likewise...you know nothing,not the minute nor the hour.

That you have constantly failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt, and when called on your attempts resort to name calling and personal abuse.

Phoe,As you know I am always correct,why don't you stop supporting and agreeing with.....Fools,Come on.......you do know better,steve..anyway tell me how can the truth be called Name Calling or Abuse

What a maroon you are, you are never right because you only use islamonazi sources