Talk:February 14, 2006

From BluWiki

Torah Observant v. Talmud Observant

I'd say that Rafiq's statement is somewhat correct, Talmud and Torah are different. Talmud is Torah-Plus, and that plus is mostly ancient Canaanite and Mesopotamean traditions, historical legends, and the personal biases of the group of Rabbis that contributed their thoughts (Torah is like the wiki article, Talmud is the Wiki article along with passeges of the discussion board). Since there was a wide variance of factions, the Talmud is inherantly contradictory, yet, Rabbinical Judaism consider's it holy, sometimes (not always, but sometimes nonetheless) even more so than Torah itself, thus Judaism is at it's heart a shadowy, indefinite religion that one can justify just about anything with, just like Catholicism and worse yet, Hinduism (remember, there is a group called Karaites who reject Judaism strictly upon this basis, look at the the faq of Karaite Korner website). Some of those factions appear to have had bizzare racial theories as well (another thing non-apparent within Torah or the whole of Tanakh/Old Testament itself, but quite prevailant throughout the rest of the world more or less).

Now, add to this the strict vertical structure of Rabbinic Judaism throughout the centuries, where below the Rabbi, most are required to obay with little question (Talmud itself states that one follow his Rabbi in all things, even more so than Torah), and the Rabbi has had solely the power of interpriting scripture save for the rituals which give Judaism it's identity, than one has to assume that corruption OF SOME SORT is an inevitability, ESPECIALLY given the corruption within similar systems such as Roman Catholicism. Thanks