The Anti Defamation League's Disgusting Polemic On Anti Semitism

In the following, from which I will post excerpts, Abraham Foxman and the rest of the ADL disgustingly and perhaps even disingenously label Messianic Jews (including Messianic Karaites), Non-Messianic Karaites and other Non-Messianic Jews, and others as Anti Semitic for criticizing Talmud Bavli and P'rushi Yahadut as a perversion of Tanakh and Yahadut.

The Anti Defamation League In Self-Hating-Jewish Polemics

• "Recently there has been a renewal of attacks on Judaism and Jews through
  recycling of old accusations and distortions about the Talmud. Anti-
  Talmud tracts were originally developed in the Middle Ages as Christian
  polemics against Judaism, but today they emanate from a variety of
  Christian, Moslem and secular sources. Sometimes such “studies” have
  blatantly anti-Semitic tones; sometimes they are more subtle. Yet all of
  them remain as false and pernicious today as they did in the Middle Ages.
  
  "Because of their unfortunate frequent reappearance, there is a need to
  
  
  formally rebut these accusations and canards. The Anti-Defamation
  
  
  League developed the following essay that explains in an honest and
  
  
  scholarly way the Talmudic teachings as understood by Jewish religious
  
  authorities."

Many of these "anti-Semitic sources" are Messianic Jews, Non-Messianic Karaites, and other Jews who are well versed in, have or had consistently studied, and left P'rushi Yahadut because of Talmud Bavli.

• "Are the polemicists anti-Semites? This is a charged term that should not be used lightly,
  but the answer, by and large, is yes. Now and then a polemicist of this type may himself
  have been born Jewish, but rfrom contemporary Jews, and their dismissal of any
  voices opposing their own, suggests that their goal in reading ancient rabbinic literature is
  to produce the Frankenstein version of Judaism that they invariably claim to have
  uncovered."

An ad hominem right in the beginning, it charges that G-d is also an Anti Semite. Tanakh clearly warns not to add or take from it.

• "In fact many anti-Talmud polemicists have never studied the Talmud at all."

Deliberate misstatement of fact. As aforementioned, "Many of these "anti-Semitic sources" are Messianic Jews, Non-Messianic Karaites, and other Jews who are well versed in, have or had consistently studied, and left P'rushi Yahadut because of Talmud Bavli." For example, Nehemia Gordon was born and raised the son of a recently-deceased "rabbi".

• "The visceral hatred that Jews are alleged to bear for non-Jews is
  proven, they claim, by a variety of statements in the Talmud and by Jewish law itself,
  which purportedly encourages Jews to exploit their non-Jewish neighbors and engage in
  criminal activities against them."

One need look no further than a devout follower of Talmud Bavli-- Meir Kahane. Also, Yaron Yardan-- one of the Non-Messianic Jews who was in a yeshiva for years-- cites, among other parshot b'P'rushi halakhah (Menakhot 73b):

The peace-offerings of gentiles are to be treated as burnt-offerings.

1 This I can prove either by

simple reasoning or by a verse from Scripture. Either by simple reasoning: because a gentile in his

heart [devotes the offering entirely] to Heaven.

2 Or by a verse from Scripture: Which they will offer

unto the Lord for a burnt-offering:

3 whatever they4 offer shall be a burnt-offering.

R. Hama b. Guria raised an objection: If a gentile made a freewill-offering of peace-offerings and

he gave them to an Israelite,

5 the Israelite may eat them;6 if he gave them to a priest, the priest may

eat them.

6 — Raba answered, It means this: if [he gave them to an Israelite] that the Israelite shall

receive atonement thereby,
7 the Israelite may eat them;

if [he gave them to a priest] that the priest

shall receive atonement thereby, the priest may eat them.

So goyim can't recieve kippur for their own korbanot. By the way, the Soncino or Artscroll translation does not matter in this case-- the original content and context, to which the Soncino is closer, is the same.

• "One of the more horrifying charges leveled at Judaism is that it condones the sexual
  molestation of young girls. This charge was made in 1892 by the Russian Catholic cleric
  Reverend I.B. Pranaitis in his Latin book,
  Christianus in Talmude Iudaeorum. Despite
  Pranaitis’ humiliation at the Beilis blood libel trial in 1913, where as an “expert” witness
  for the prosecution he demonstrated during cross-examination that he could not answer
  even simple questions about the Talmud, his book was translated into English in 1939,
  and the charge has been making the rounds in anti-Semitic circles ever since."

Notorious talmidim of Talmud Bavli (e.g., Yisroel Shapiro) had and have molested countless young women and even young man. Examples one and two (Be warned-- these are graphic, and maybe not even the most graphic. There are ones which I won't post here. And is Abraham Foxman a pedophile?):

1. "Our Rabbis taught: It is related of Justinia¹⁷ the daughter of 'Aseverus son of Antonius that she once appeared before Rabbi 'Master', she said to him, 'at what age may a woman marry?'. 'At the age of three years and one day', he told her. 'And at what age is she capable of conception?' 'At the age of twelve years and one day', he replied. 'I', she said to him, 'married at the age of six and bore a child at the age of seven; alas for the three years that I have lost at my father's house'. But can a woman conceive at the age of six years? Did not R. Bibi recite in the presence of R. Nahman: Three classes of woman may use an absorbent¹⁸ in their marital intercourse:¹⁹ A minor, and an expectant and a nursing mother. The minor,²⁰ because otherwise she might become pregnant and die. An expectant mother,²⁰ because otherwise she might cause her foetus to degenerate into a sandal.²¹ A nursing mother,²⁰ because otherwise she might have to wean her child prematurely,²² and this would result in his death. And what is the age of such a 'minor'?²³ From the age of eleven years and one day to the age of twelve years and one day. One who is under²⁴ or over this age²⁵ must carry on her marital intercourse in a normal manner; so R. Meir." (Niddah 45a)
2. "But is she,¹ however, capable of [normal] conception?² Did not R. Bibi recite in the presence of R. Nahman:³ Three [categories of] women may use an absorbent⁴ in their marital intercourse:⁵ a minor, and an expectant and nursing mother. The minor,⁶ because otherwise she might become pregnant and die. An expectant mother,⁶ because otherwise she might cause her foetus to degenerate into a sandal.⁷ A nursing mother,⁶ because otherwise she might have to wean her child [prematurely]⁸ and this would result in his death.⁹ And what is [the age of such] a minor?¹⁰ From the age of eleven years and one day to the age of twelve years and one day. One who is under,¹¹ or over this age¹² must carry on her marital intercourse in a normal manner; so R. Meir. But the Sages said: The one as well as the other carries on her marital intercourse in a normal manner, and mercy¹³ will be vouchsafed from Heaven, for it is said in the Scriptures, The Lord preserveth the simple.¹⁴ And should you reply that this is a case where she conceived when she was a na'arah and gave birth to a child when she was still a na'arah [it could be objected:] Does one give birth to a child within six months [after conception]? Did not Samuel, in fact, state: The period between the age of na'aruth¹⁵ and that of bagruth¹⁶ is only six months? And should you suggest [that he meant to say] that there were no less but more [than six months] surely [it could be retorted] he used the expression, only'!¹⁷ It must be this, then, that he¹⁸ asked: Is the state of adolescence¹⁹ attainable in the grave²⁰ and her father consequently forfeits²¹ [his right],²² or is perhaps the state of adolescence not attainable in the grave²³ and the father, therefore, does not forfeit²⁴ [his right]? " (Ketubot 39a)

I could go on, but you get the point by now.