The Barbarian Bible

by Ianto Watt

  So, when the story that was told by ‘The Voice’ is recounted, by 70 different men to other men, is it going to be exactly as they heard it? Maybe the first time, even the second. But pretty soon, with the passage of time (say, 3,000 years), will it be the same? Not likely. Have you ever heard of the game called ‘Telephone’? That’s where a group of kids sit in a big circle and the first one whispers a statement to the person on the right, and that person repeats it (whispering) to the next, and so on, until the circle has been completed. Then the last one is asked what they were told, and they say aloud what they heard. It’s never anything close to what the original statement was! So, am I saying that these original 70 men were diabolic schemers out to foil God? No, it’s much simpler than that. They were simply proud men who thought they had been graced with a direct revelation from God, and therefore, they were the equal, if not the superior, of Moses.

  And if what they heard differed at all from what they saw on the tablets Moses brought upon his return, then they had a secret desire to resist ‘his’ law, because of course, they were privy to a superior version of that law! Isn’t that exactly what Moses’ brother Aaron and his sister Miriam thought when they said to him (and I paraphrase here), ‘hey, what makes you so special? We’re just as clued in as you, maybe even more so’. That’s when the God of Moses struck them both with leprosy, which Moses cured, once they repented of their prideful talk. So, even at the beginning, the High Priest (Aaron) was resistant to the prophet Moses, his brother, who obviously was the one chosen by the Jewish God, if miracles mean anything. By the way, Aaron was the older brother. Hahahah! So typical.

  Now if you were one of those other 70 men, and you felt Moses was wrong on some point, would you speak up? Not likely, not when Moses seemed to have all the miraculous powers, like making the first born of all Egypt drop dead. And in fact, when Moses did come down after 40 days, there was an open rebellion at first (Exodus 32;19), instigated (but not openly led) by these proud ones. The rebellion consisted in things like debauchery. Moses responded by calling for those who believed in his revelation to kill about twenty thousand of the rebels. No, after an example like that, you would likely keep quiet, except among yourselves, nursing your pride-driven grudge, waiting for the opportune time to overthrow that ‘tyrant’ Moses. In the meantime, you secretly recruit more members, proud ones like yourself, who you initiate into the ‘enlightened’ secrets of your ‘revealed knowledge’. In the meantime, all the simple folk continue to read the simple tablets Moses brought, and which never change, because they are, literally, written in stone.

  It’s simple human nature. Fallen nature, that is, one fueled by pride. And over the years and decades and centuries and finally millenniums, this secretive tradition has morphed into the group known in the New Testament as The Pharisees. They are the same Levitical group that ruled Israel through the theocracy of their priesthood at the time Jesus came. And they ruled Israel with an iron hand. And this iron hand came in the form of over 14,000 ‘regulations’ versus ‘The Decalogue’ (or 10 Laws) of Moses. These Pharisees asserted that only they could give the ‘proper interpretation’ of Mosaic Law.

  Now if you have ever dealt with Federal or State regulators who hide behind ‘regulations’ that were never passed by the legislature, but which are routinely upheld by the courts as having the force of law, you know what we are talking about here. And this is exactly the situation that Jesus was describing and condemning when he came. He denounced the Rabbinic-Talmudic rulers of the Jews, the Scribes (i.e. the lawyers) and Pharisees (i.e. the regulators and the courts) for the oppressive burdens they had laid on the little people. And while many of the criticisms Jesus made were veiled in parables, the Pharisees knew exactly who he was aiming at. Which is why they aimed back.

  But the Scribes and Pharisees wore a velvet glove over their iron fist, all the better to mask their real thoughts. And what were those thoughts, and have they changed at all over the past 3,000 years? In a minute we’ll take a look at their beliefs and see how they differed from Torah (OT) Judaism, as revealed by the God of Moses. This is the story of the Talmud (which translated means ‘the instruction’) and how it has replaced Mosaic Law in the life of today’s Jews.

  But first, let’s summarize this thing; the Old Testament prophesied a Messiah who would offer to save the entire world from sin. Some Jews believed this messiah came in the person of Jesus, the ‘suffering servant’. They believed he will come again, as the conquering hero for ALL who repent, regardless of race and nationality. These Jewish believers (Peter and the Apostles et. al.) were thrown out of the Temple and the synagogues by the Pharisees. Less than forty years later, the Romans crushed the Jewish nation, destroying the Temple and the priesthood. The Jews who believed Jesus was the messiah gradually became known as Christians, a separate religion, but one which claimed a direct Jewish lineage back to Abraham. After all, they were Jews who worshipped a Jewish King, a son of David, so it makes sense that the Christian religion claims a Jewish root which they say is the fulfillment of Judaic promise and prophecy.

  So in this regard, yes, Mosaic OT Judaism does have a believable, desirable messiah. The problem is that it’s not what we know as Judaism today, regardless of whether you mean Mosaic or Rabbinic Judaism. That’s because Mosaic (Torah) Judaism died in 70 AD, and so it no longer exists. Torah Judaism was replaced by Rabbinic (Talmudic) Judaism. And Rabbinic Judaism doesn’t recognize Jesus or anyone else, including Abe Foxman, as the messiah. That’s why Abe is such an angry guy, by the way.

  Talmudic Judaism on the other hand, promised a Messiah who would save only Israel from the Romans and the rest of the gentile world (which was, of course, the world of Rome). The Talmudic Jews (the Pharisees) despised the ‘suffering servant’ messianic image, and held out for the ‘conquering hero’ version. They’re still waiting.

  The problem, of course, is that these two promises, taken individually, are diametrically opposed to one another. The Torah spoke of a savior who would save all men, Jew and Gentile alike (assuming they repent) from sin, which is what the Torah said had brought death into the world. The Talmud speaks of a savior who would save only the Jews from the Romans (and their descendants) so that the Jews would not have to repent (and die). After all, why should a Jew have to repent, when he cannot sin, at least not against a gentile? And if, as the Talmud teaches, no circumcised son of Abraham will go to hell, why should he have to repent at all, let alone die? Whoops, did I say no Jew would go to hell? Well, according to the Talmud, the only exceptions are 3 bad kings (Jeroboam, Ahab, and Manasseh) and three commoners (Doeg, Ahitophel and Gehazi). Oh yeah, and that fellow named Jesus. Everyone else in Judaism has a free pass, regardless of how many ham sandwiches they eat.

  Now let’s cheat a little here and jump ahead and make note of the fact that the next religion we will examine (Christianity, or more precisely Holy Roman Christianity), lays total and direct claim to the promises of the Torah, as it claims to have superseded the earthly nation of Israel. The Church claims to be the New Israel, and this rankles the hell out of the Talmudic remnant of Judah. But what can the Jews of today do to refute this claim? After all, they no longer have a Temple, nor a genealogically proven Priesthood, and thus there can be no valid Sacrifice as required in the Torah? Obviously, they needed a Plan B.

  But wait- let’s think about this for a minute. I know I didn’t include it in the list of criteria, but there’s the little matter of dogma to consider here. Now the reason I didn’t consider dogma to be the defining matter in judging a religious belief was because, like Pascal, my criteria for examining competing religious claims is to ‘forget the dogma, look at the miracles’. But that’s in reference to one religion’s dogma versus another religion’s dogma. And dogma, by definition, has to be un-changing, otherwise it’s simply ‘opinion’. Speaking of this, have you ever seen that bumper sticker that says ‘my Karma ran over your Dogma’? I made one that said ‘my Dogma pee’d on your Karma’, but I couldn’t
sell a single one. Oh well.

  But what happens when one religion’s dogma changes? What can we think of a religion that has to change its dogma, its core, doctrinal beliefs? How can that logically change without changing the essence of itself? I mean, how can a dog, all of the sudden, claim to really be a cat? Who’s going to listen (besides Richard Dawkins)? Dogma is indeed a critical point whenever it changes. Because by definition, dogma cannot change, or it wasn’t true to begin with (or else the new version is false).

  But let’s be clear here. Dogma can be refined. Dogma can be further developed and explained. It can be further applied. Dogma can grow and mature, like any living organism. A tree can grow, but it’s still a tree. But an oak tree will always be an oak tree, not an elm. It can’t ever change in its essence, because then its original form has been denied, and the religion that originally proclaimed it has changed into something else. And that’s exactly what happened with Torah Judaism. It practitioners changed its essence and it became Talmudic Judaism.

  And when did this dogma publicly change? The last straw in the change of the dogma came when the priesthood changed. Remember grandson, that the priesthood, legally speaking, was the ultimate representative of the people, because Israel was a theocracy. The last change came at the very moment when Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea, presented Jesus to the crowd and said, ‘Shall I crucify your King?’ That’s when the Jewish High Priests exclaimed ‘we have no king but Caesar’ (John 19;15). This was the exact moment when they openly denied their own prophecies that their messiah-king would be Jewish, and be a direct lineal descendant of King David.

  This denial came from the mouths of their own interpreters of their dogma, their own High Priest. He was speaking on behalf of the whole nation, because, remember, this was a theocracy, and the word of the High Priest was Law. Especially since the King of the Jews (whoever he might be at the moment) couldn’t be king unless the High Priests could verify his lineage from Judah (on through King David, then Solomon, etc) just as the priesthood had to verify its own Levitical lineage. And Caesar wasn’t Jewish, let alone from the tribe of Judah.

  And so, when the High Priests stated ‘we have no king but Caesar’, at that moment Torah Judaism flat-lined, and the Jews simply became subjects of Caesar, just like everyone else in the Empire. That was the final distinction between The Chosen Ones and the Gentiles, and it had been swept away in one sentence. Jews were now Gentiles, like everyone else.

  But like all ironies of history, the Gentiles would repay this compliment of imitation by becoming Jews, in so many senses of the word. The Pagans who became Christian saw their conversion as a move to the fulfillment of (Torah) Judaism. And the Gentiles who refused to become Christians ultimately became Talmudic Jews (like the Khazars, and the Orthodox and then, finally the Protestants). But I’m getting ahead of myself here, and we have to wait for Part II of the book to talk about that, because that change will lead us directly to the end, at the New Troy. But for now, let’s get back to our examination of Judaism, and how it did (or didn’t) meet the five criteria for logical belief. And now, back to our story about how Judaism changed, dogmatically, liturgically, historically.

  And so, here’s the rub- the Jews had to change their religion because they no longer could fulfill the requirements of it, as laid out in the third book of the Torah, the Book of Leviticus. And this is how we got the Talmud. The Talmud eliminated the original 3 requirements of worship, and in the process excluded all who were not Talmudic Jews from any potential participation in the Messianic Age. And thus, we have the new promise of the ‘new’ Judaism. The new promise of the Talmud was that when the Messiah came, he would conquer the gentile world, reducing it to virtual slavery in a Jewish kingdom that would literally rule the world, from Jerusalem of course. And since Jesus refused to be that conquering general, in spite of his reportedly miraculous powers, then he obviously couldn’t be the real messiah!

  And so, we have to conclude that whatever the Torah promised, it can’t be delivered to anyone under the auspices of today’s ‘Talmudic Judaism’, because the Chosen Ones have chosen to abandon the Torah in favor of the Talmud. And since the Talmud promises us gentiles little better than plantation life picking cotton for the new masters of the universe, it’s a little silly to dwell on what a great thing the Talmud is. Unless you want to convert to Talmudic Judaism. In which case you’ll need to start hating all your gentile friends, as they are ‘untermenschen’ (sub-humans).

  Now most folks think that this phrase was a Nazi invention, but the fact is, they stole it from the original inventors, the Talmudic Jews. Don’t believe me? Then look it up, in the Talmud. “The Jews are called human beings, but the non-Jews are not humans. They are beasts.”4 The Nazi’s were simply plagiarizers, among their other ghastly and murderous faults. But imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, eh?

  So what is this new Talmudic version of Judaism? Who leads it, and what do they hope for? Well, let’s take a look before we close this chapter on the first contestant.

  The Talmud is the ‘Bizarro’ version of Judaism. It is the written version of the Pharisees’ Oral History that they claim to have received at the base of Mt. Sinai (while Moses was at the peak, getting the Torah). It is contained in a series of 63 written volumes. Oh yeah, plus another 4 volumes of related commentary. Well, hey, why not just read the entire Encyclopedia Britannica?

  The first part of the Talmud is composed of the Mischnah which is the Oral Law that the Jewish God supposedly spoke to the 70 Elders during Moses’ 40 day stint on Mt. Sinai. This Oral Law was supposedly given by God to the 70 elders in addition to the 10 Commandments and the 613 lesser commandments (‘mitzvot’) given to Moses, all recorded in Exodus, the second book of the Torah.

  This Oral Tradition (the Bizarro O.T.) is the heart of Talmudic Judaism. It was supposedly passed on secretly from the time of Moses down to the Levites and Priests and then the Judges and the Prophets. It was never written down until 200 AD or so. In other words, quite a while after the time of Christ, and about 1700 years after Moses. The second part of the Talmud is the Gemarah, (written about 500 AD) which details the rulings of subsequent squabbles amongst various Pharisees and Rabbi’s over what the Mischnah really means. Are you dizzy yet? Wait, there’s more. Lots more.

  Here’s where it really gets confusing for anyone who wants a hard, fast logical answer to any particular theological question in Talmudic Judaism. The Rabbis claim that their belief system includes the Torah, but that the Torah is subordinated to the rulings of the Talmud. So much for Moses, eh? But the next problem with trying to logically understand the Talmudic system of belief is that when there is a dispute, theologically speaking, amongst the believers, there are no wrong answers. That is because the contents of these 67 volumes are really the record of all the disputes between different Rabbis throughout the centuries. 67 volumes? How is the average person supposed to read all that in one lifetime in 500 AD, or even today?

  And what about all the internal disputes between the two main camps of Rabbis within the Talmud, known as the Schools of Hillel and of Shimmai (roughly equivalent to liberals and conservatives)? Who’s right when there’s a disagreement? Where’s the High Priest when you need him? The best way I can explain the Talmud is to say that it is the world’s first Blog Site. It’s where rabbi’s log on and slam each other as they attempt to defend their own interpretation of the Torah. And the Rabbis have expanded the 613 rules of behavior found in Exodus to over 14,000 rules today regarding every facet of life. This makes it impossible to live even a simple life without consulting the Rabbi on everything. No wonder Jesus condemned them- it was impossible to live without violating some idiotic rule, and the penalty was to pay a monetary fine, conveniently called a ‘penance’. No Hail Mary’s here, just show me the money! Guess who got to collect the fine? Here you go, Rabbi. Please forgive me!

  Thus, these disputes or debates between these two competing schools of Talmudic thought (Hill
el vs. Shammai) produced an ongoing Hegelian dialectic process of thesis, antithesis, and then synthesis. Or put more simply, the past clashes with the present to produce the future (which then become the next version of the past, with the passage of time). Then the process begins anew, and each cycle of destruction of the past beliefs, by the present challenger, brings forth the new future belief. Ultimately, anything was possible given enough time. Sounds like evolution, right? So, then, when the little guy in the pew of the synagogue becomes confused about what to believe, what is he to do?

  Well, not to worry. When two Rabbis disagree, you can take your pick, they’re both right! At least, that’s what the Rabbis say. The only real rule in Talmudic Judaism is that if push comes to shove between the Torah (Moses) and the Talmud (the Scribes and Pharisees), then you have to choose the Talmud. But it doesn’t matter which Talmudic school you choose to follow (Hillel or Shammai) as long as you chose one or the other, and ignore the Torah. It’s like saying that you can vote either Republican (Shammai) or Democrat (Hillel), just don’t vote for a third party. And no write-ins! And given the track record of both parties, at least from a spending perspective, it’s easy to see how they are really one and the same. So it’s simple- as long as you follow the Rabbi, ANY Rabbi, you’re OK. Even if that Rabbi says Moses was wrong. Seriously. In other words, the Talmud corrects the Torah.

  You don’t believe me, grandson? Let’s see what the Talmud itself says about these disputes between Torah and Talmud; “My son, give heed to the words of the Scribes rather than to the words of the (Mosaic) Law.” 5 Here’s another Talmudic excerpt: “He who transgresses the words of the Scribes sins more gravely than the transgressors of the words of the (Mosaic) Law.”6 Here’s another; “The Sacred Scripture (Torah) is like water, the Mischnah is like wine, and the Gemarah (is like) aromatic wine.” 7