Is recognition that Jews have the best ideology of the Abrahamic cults the reason Muslims and Christians hate Jews?

[basics]

Gnostic Christian Bishop,

The words came from Jesus as recorded by the writer who we can assume was also a witness as were the questioners who tried to hoodwink Him. Paul later affirms that by saying that any Christian must give loyalty to whatever ruler he or she was under and if possible be the best at it.

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Gnostic Christian Bishop,

The words came from Jesus as recorded by the writer who we can assume was also a witness as were the questioners who tried to hoodwink Him. Paul later affirms that by saying that any Christian must give loyalty to whatever ruler he or she was under and if possible be the best at it.

You do know that all the witnesses to Jesus, if he lived at all, would have been dead by the time the scriptures were written. Right?

I think the only way we can evaluate the goodness of Jesus is by looking at the morality of his policies.

If you are up for that, we might actually get somewhere while discussions on Jesus' reality will get us nowhere.

I have a couple of moral issues against Jesus. His no-divorce policy for one, and his substitutionary atonement policy that you plan to use as a get into heaven fee pass, after you put your responsibility for you sins upon an innocent victim.

Let me get your response here for what I asked you elsewhere.
Having another innocent person suffer for the wrongs youhave done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them,--- is immoral.
Do you agree?
As Ingersoll said; 'no man wouldbe fit for heaven who would consent that an innocent person should suffer forhis sin.'

Regards
DL

[fkizz]

I have a couple of moral issues against Jesus. His no-divorce policy for one, and his substitutionary atonement policy that you plan to use as a get into heaven fee pass, after you put your responsibility for you sins upon an innocent victim.

1- Jesus on "divorce" just says man and woman are made to be one flesh and it is not a good thing they end up separated (depending on bible version, but it's among those lines). He does not say "Thou Shall Not Divorce" in anyway.

2- Roman Catholics say the same as you do on this issue to prove to Calvinists that Catholicism is correct. Catholic point of view in one of the angles is that Jesus between having his life spared and renouncing his claims, and continuing with his claims and possibly end up tortured and killed, he choose to follow his beliefs/ideas even under very real threat of torture and death penalty, because he saw such as very small compared to His message.

The literal opposite of Sabbati Zevi in September 16, 1666.

[basics]

Jesus Christ was ordained to be, " The Lamb of God sacrificed before the foundations of the world." Long before the worlds were made this was ordained in heaven so not only is He our Creator and our Redeemer but our Judge at the closing of this creation. So, when He talks of a man and a woman being bound together as one, He also is showing His binding of His church to Himself as one marriage. A person can divorce but they cannot remarry if their ex-partner is still alive. That is laid down by Paul as given to him by Jesus. But, if a man and his spouse are not born again and they divorce, then if rebirth takes place to one or even the two, then as new creations in Christ, they can marry again but only to another who is reborn of the Spirit of God. That is what Paul teaches and corresponds with Christ's teaching as well. Being born again of the Spirit of God changes everything.

[Dracula]

Eye for eye and tooth for tooth was given as an example of justice. It was not given as a reciprocity rule.

Get your log out of your eye before looking at my splinter.

Regards
DL

You are missing the point. There is no proof either of Rabbi Hillel having existed, or having said somethhing, or any such words to had been parth of the Torrah. And they aren't in the posterior books Caballa, what should one know. So there is a deliberate attempt on side of gnosticism and judaism to steal christian teachings for to displace christianity.

[sumskilz]

There is no proof either of Rabbi Hillel having existed, or having said somethhing, or any such words to had been parth of the Torrah. And they aren't in the posterior books Caballa, what should one know.

There is as much historical evidence for Hillel as there is for Jesus, not that his literal historicity actually matters to the tradition, and it is quite clear that you don't actually know what either of the Hebrew words you just used actually mean. If you think the OP's perspective is silly or wrong or whatever, then I'd say debate that rather than randomly talking out your ass. If you mean Hillel was not in the Pentateuch, that is correct, but no one has claimed as much. Naturally he wouldn't be since he lived after it was written.

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

1- Jesus on "divorce" just says man and woman are made to be one flesh and it is not a good thing they end up separated (depending on bible version, but it's among those lines). He does not say "Thou Shall Not Divorce" in anyway.

Mark 10;9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Mathew 19;8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

God is also said to never change his mind or laws and Jesus endorsed the no-divorce rule.

2- Roman Catholics say the same as you do on this issue to prove to Calvinists that Catholicism is correct. Catholic point of view in one of the angles is that Jesus between having his life spared and renouncing his claims, and continuing with his claims and possibly end up tortured and killed, he choose to follow his beliefs/ideas even under very real threat of torture and death penalty, because he saw such as very small compared to His message.

There are many angles but none that refute these views.
Having another innocent person suffer for the wrongs youhave done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them,--- is immoral.

As Ingersoll said; 'no man would be fit for heaven who would consent that aninnocent person should suffer for his sin.'

You are missing the point. There is no proof either of Rabbi Hillel having existed, or having said somethhing, or any such words to had been parth of the Torrah. And they aren't in the posterior books Caballa, what should one know. So there is a deliberate attempt on side of gnosticism and judaism to steal christian teachings for to displace christianity.

We cannot know who existed back then and have top go by logic and reason to determine if what is given makes sense. The fact that Jesus, who also might just be a fictional character also put the golden rule as his number one rule. I say number one because his original number one cannot be done.

There is as much historical evidence for Hillel as there is for Jesus, not that his literal historicity actually matters to the tradition, and it is quite clear that you don't actually know what either of the Hebrew words you just used actually mean. If you think the OP's perspective is silly or wrong or whatever, then I'd say debate that rather than randomly talking out your ass. If you mean Hillel was not in the Pentateuch, that is correct, but no one has claimed as much. Naturally he wouldn't be since he lived after it was written.

Many do not want to argue morality and tend to deflect into debates of reality of people or Gods that end nowhere.

They thus follow a genocidal son murdering God without ever looking at the morality of genocide and killing so many when their God could have cured all those souls just as easily.

Theist refuse to judge their genocidal God and end in endorsing evil and genocide.

Regards
DL

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Jesus Christ was ordained to be, " The Lamb of God sacrificed before the foundations of the world." Long before the worlds were made this was ordained in heaven so not only is He our Creator and our Redeemer but our Judge at the closing of this creation..

Interesting.

So God knew that Eve would be tempted even before he put Satan and or the talking serpent in Eden.

So tell us why he put Satan in Eden knowing she would screw up his creation?

And don't you think it strange that God would choose to show man about barbaric and immoral human sacrifice for atonement when he could atone without that?

Why are you endorsing the punishment of the innocent instead of the guilty?

Why would any decent judge?

Please do not give us your stock, we could not pay the costs, as before creation of the earth is the time line and the costs had yet to be set down.

Do try for a logical and moral answer which is not usually what you give.

Regards
DL

[fkizz]

There is as much historical evidence for Hillel as there is for Jesus, not that his literal historicity actually matters to the tradition, and it is quite clear that you don't actually know what either of the Hebrew words you just used actually mean. If you think the OP's perspective is silly or wrong or whatever, then I'd say debate that rather than randomly talking out your ass. If you mean Hillel was not in the Pentateuch, that is correct, but no one has claimed as much. Naturally he wouldn't be since he lived after it was written.

This types of "did character X really exist?" debates often end up sort of poisoned. What does this mean? Some people often will raise question if there is 100% proof said person X existed. But there's a plethora of { W, Z , V ... Y } of historically people with equal or even less amount of proof that get ignored and get a free pass, with an insistent focus on person X.

Putting in more objective terms, did Leonardo da Vinci really exist as one person or was it the name of a covert Guild of Inventors, that we nowadays atribute the credit to a single human being when maybe it was a group called Leonardo da Vinci?

Did Julius Caesar really exist by the end of his reign, or did he die in battle and some other similiar looking military commander took his place by the end and that's the reason he got murdered by Julius former high trust personel?

List can go on endlessly. Being logically consistent, if one goes on the "did historical person X exist" there's a Huge list awaiting for same criteria, that often gets ignored. Person choosed as X to be examined is often out of a political agenda than legit research.

[basics]

Gnostic Christian Bishop,

If you read Genesis you will see that as soon as Adam ate of the fruit their eyes were opened and they realised they had sinned. So yes, God knew what would happen and had already made provision for it in Jesus Christ. So why did God do that? For the simple reason that for His good pleasure all this was to happen. You seem to have this idea that we are superior to God and therefore God is cruel yet if you read the Bible you must come to the conclusion that the whole thing is about Jesus Christ, the Son of God and that we in this story are but bit part players, why? Because He is God and we are but His creation to do with in whatsoever manner He thinks fit. In the end it is His plan that will be fulfilled but, and there is always a but, people all over the world of whatever nation have the opportunity to be saved and therefore not go into eternal torment. The choice is theirs to believe God and be saved or like you not to and face the consequences.

You speak of the innocent as if there were any. You still cannot understand what happened at the fall. Sin entered man and until that sin is removed not one person could enter heaven after they die. Being actively sinning does not matter because there is no scale of sin. It is now in the very nature of man and unless he has a rebirth it cannot ever be taken out of him. That is where God the Son in coming to this planet, dying on a cross by shedding His blood which was sinless could assuage the Law and therefore please God the Father by taking away the sin for whom He died. Man could never do this and how could he because the story is more about Jesus than mere man. Until you realise that you'll never get the rest.

[Dracula]

Gnostic bishops should have more insight into the fact that, the ideology of the jews, aside from killing goats and adorning altars wiith their entrails, and humans, in the earlier period - is an ideology to put to death anyone who is not a jew for Jehovah, who happens to be an egyptian god. And, that they couldn't ever carry it out in practise doesn't mean that it isn't such, simply they didn't have the means and the things in this world didn't answer the descriptions and expectations of that religion. Also, a jewish saint is proclaimed who has killed the enemies of such religion. It's more like the cult of the Assasin's Sheikh of the Mountain than a true religion. But - there is somewhere a sacred xerocopied text from another religion, and I guess we should all fall in awe and twist our eyes in praise to god how advanced it was. Which - when I think carefully, there even isn't any - such text, it was too primitive to accept anything not connected to goats.

So to which text do you refer when proclaiming excellence of any such thing ? And specify excellence for whom.

Sects are funny when advertising; and even each other, having a common goal.

[basics]

Gnostic bishops should have more insight into the fact that, the ideology of the jews, aside from killing goats and adorning altars wiith their entrails, and humans, in the earlier period - is an ideology to put to death anyone who is not a jew for Jehovah, who happens to be an egyptian god. And, that they couldn't ever carry it out in practise doesn't mean that it isn't such, simply they didn't have the means and the things in this world didn't answer the descriptions and expectations of that religion. Also, a jewish saint is proclaimed who has killed the enemies of such religion. It's more like the cult of the Assasin's Sheikh of the Mountain than a true religion. But - there is somewhere a sacred xerocopied text from another religion, and I guess we should all fall in awe and twist our eyes in praise to god how advanced it was. Which - when I think carefully, there even isn't any - such text, it was too primitive to accept anything not connected to goats.

So to which text do you refer when proclaiming excellence of any such thing ? And specify excellence for whom.

Sects are funny when advertising; and even each other, having a common goal.

Dracula,

If Genesis is our guide to creation as given to Moses then the first person accounted righteous before God long before their was a place called Egypt was Abel, second son of Adam who was not Jewish in the sense that we identify Jews. But as Paul writes a true Jew is not one cut in the flesh, rather one cut in the heart. To begin with God's name is Elohim, which has plural connotations as to His nature and when the fall came with the promise of a Saviour as well as the Law, He became known as Jehovah Elohim which basically means The I AM That I AM in Father, Son and Holy Spirit, One God.

[sumskilz]

Gnostic bishops should have more insight into the fact that, the ideology of the jews, aside from killing goats and adorning altars wiith their entrails, and humans, in the earlier period - is an ideology to put to death anyone who is not a jew for Jehovah, who happens to be an egyptian god. And, that they couldn't ever carry it out in practise doesn't mean that it isn't such, simply they didn't have the means and the things in this world didn't answer the descriptions and expectations of that religion. Also, a jewish saint is proclaimed who has killed the enemies of such religion.

Altars weren't adorned with entrails, animals were slaughtered in the same manner as modern kosher laws and a small portion was burned on an alter while the rest was eaten by the priests. Jews never venerated a deity named Jehovah. That transliteration/pronunciation is an ignorant extrapolation. It comes from misunderstanding that the vowel pointing on YHWH in the Masoretic text is actually for the word Adonai, and in fact, there wasn't much Egyptian influence on Jewish religion until the Hellenistic period. Early conceptions of Yahweh are most similar to other Canaanite deities. Your claim about Jewish saints is a complete fabrication.

Anyway, everything Gnostic Christian Bishop has referenced has been Rabbinic Judasim, not Second Temple Judaism or proto-Jewish Canaanite practices.

[DaniCatBurger]

For those who have a Babylonian Talmud at home: Shabbath folio 31a - just to do what old fashioned humanistic practise corresponds.

[fkizz]

Anyway, everything Gnostic Christian Bishop has referenced has been Rabbinic Judasim, not Second Temple Judaism or proto-Jewish Canaanite practices.

Problem when people talk of Judaism is this. Same words refer to a plethora of different things one cannot understand which one of them is it.

Rabinnic Judaism are the religious reforms after defeat of Messiah prospect Simon Bar K'hova by Emperor Hadrian's army, after Jews forbbiden to visit their homeland and name of their region changed to Syria/Palestine.

With the introduction of Talmud.. in other words.. no longer the same Religious group of the Hebrews of the Old Testament. Maybe some descendants, but religion was changed under same brand name.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

[Dracula]

Altars weren't adorned with entrails, animals were slaughtered in the same manner as modern kosher laws and a small portion was burned on an alter while the rest was eaten by the priests. Jews never venerated a deity named Jehovah. That transliteration/pronunciation is an ignorant extrapolation. It comes from misunderstanding that the vowel pointing on YHWH in the Masoretic text is actually for the word Adonai, and in fact, there wasn't much Egyptian influence on Jewish religion until the Hellenistic period. Early conceptions of Yahweh are most similar to other Canaanite deities. Your claim about Jewish saints is a complete fabrication.

Anyway, everything Gnostic Christian Bishop has referenced has been Rabbinic Judasim, not Second Temple Judaism or proto-Jewish Canaanite practices.

Did you, who made up the strophes for mercy, accuse me of fabrication ?!

In Zohar (I, 28b, and 39a) :
"In the palaces of the fourth heaven are those who lamented over Sion and Jerusalem, and all those who destroyed idolatrous nations...and those who killed off people who worship idols are clothed in purple garments so that they may be recognized and honored."

They aren't called exactly with the christian term saint, but isn't it what corresponds to it ? As for the "proto-jewish practises" - since they are in the Torah, the Torah isn't jewish ?! And they included putting the entrails on the altar, burning them together ..with the dung, and ..sprinkling blood upon the altar and around it in a circle ...As if could be smth worse made than that.

https://www.biblebelievers.org.au/talmud2.htm


http://www.evilbible.com/evil-bible-...-in-the-bible/


http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/ot_list.html

[basics]

The one big problem between the Torah and the Talmud is that the former was given to Moses directly from God as though God Himself had written it. The latter however is the rabbinic interpretation of what is written and that changes from rabbi to rabbi so in effect as time has gone on the Jews have got themselves into a terrible mess because of man's interference and faulty interpretation of God's word. The example of that is the 600 odd additions to the Law as given to Moses which strangled the Jewish people which we can read of from the Bible at the time of Jesus. We can read of the party splits that this effect had on the nation and to some extent still has.

[sumskilz]

Problem when people talk of Judaism is this. Same words refer to a plethora of different things one cannot understand which one of them is it.

Rabinnic Judaism are the religious reforms after defeat of Messiah prospect Simon Bar K'hova by Emperor Hadrian's army, after Jews forbbiden to visit their homeland and name of their region changed to Syria/Palestine.

With the introduction of Talmud.. in other words.. no longer the same Religious group of the Hebrews of the Old Testament. Maybe some descendants, but religion was changed under same brand name.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Yeah, I would describe it as a particular evolution with the other branches mostly fading away or being absorbed into the Rabbinic interpretation. The Wikipedia article is pretty good, this particular section addresses what you're talking about:

Of all the major Second Temple sects, only the Pharisees remained. Their vision of Jewish law as a means by which ordinary people could engage with the sacred in their daily lives, provided them with a position from which to respond to all four challenges, in a way meaningful to the vast majority of Jews.

Following the destruction of the Temple, Rome governed Judea through a Procurator at Caesarea and a Jewish Patriarch. A former leading Pharisee, Yohanan ben Zakkai, was appointed the first Patriarch (the Hebrew word, Nasi, also means prince, or president), and he reestablished the Sanhedrin at Javneh under Pharisee control. Instead of giving tithes to the priests and sacrificing offerings at the Temple, the rabbis instructed Jews to give money to charities and study in local Synagogues, as well as to pay the Fiscus Iudaicus.

In 132, the Emperor Hadrian threatened to rebuild Jerusalem as a pagan city dedicated to Jupiter, called Aelia Capitolina. Some of the leading sages of the Sanhedrin supported a rebellion (and, for a short time, an independent state) led by Simon bar Kozeba (also called Bar Kochba, or "son of a star"); some, such as Rabbi Akiva, believed Bar Kochbah to be messiah, or king. Up until this time, a number of Christians were still part of the Jewish community. However, they did not support or take part in the revolt. Whether because they had no wish to fight, or because they could not support a second messiah in addition to Jesus, or because of their harsh treatment by Bar Kochba during his brief reign, these Christians also left the Jewish community around this time.

This revolt ended in 135 when Bar Kochba and his army were defeated. The Romans then barred Jews from Jerusalem, until Constantine allowed Jews to enter for one day each year, during the holiday of Tisha B'Av.[15]

After the suppression of the revolt the vast majority of Jews were sent into exile; shortly thereafter (around 200), Judah haNasi edited together judgments and traditions into an authoritative code, the Mishnah. This marks the transformation of Pharisaic Judaism into Rabbinic Judaism.

Although the Rabbis traced their origins to the Pharisees, Rabbinic Judaism nevertheless involved a radical repudiation of certain elements of Pharisaism—elements that were basic to Second Temple Judaism. The Pharisees had been partisan. Members of different sects argued with one another over the correctness of their respective interpretations, see also Hillel and Shammai. After the destruction of the Second Temple, these sectarian divisions ended. The term "Pharisee" was no longer used, perhaps because it was a term more often used by non-Pharisees, but also because the term was explicitly sectarian. The Rabbis claimed leadership over all Jews, and added to the Amidah the birkat haMinim (see Council of Jamnia), a prayer which in part exclaims, "Praised are You O Lord, who breaks enemies and defeats the arrogant," and which is understood as a rejection of sectarians and sectarianism. This shift by no means resolved conflicts over the interpretation of the Torah; rather, it relocated debates between sects to debates within Rabbinic Judaism.

Did you, who made up the strophes for mercy, accuse me of fabrication ?!

They aren't called exactly with the christian term saint, but isn't it what corresponds to it ?

Ah, I see you've been reading The Talmud Unmasked again. You know it pairs well with The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. I figured that I only had to prod a bit to get you to reveal your sources and agenda.

https://www.biblebelievers.org.au/talmud2.htm

Interesting that it would translate an acronym for "worshipers of the stars" as "Christians" when it of course refers to those who venerate "pagan" deities symbolized by stars (actually the sun, moon and planets for the most part). I think I've read that strange translation somewhere before, oh yeah - The Talmud Unmasked. Seems to be a popular source on the internet.

About the Leviticus reference though, yes they burned the cleaned organs that were not eaten.

[Dracula]

You do not like your own Thalmud, it was the Thalmud of someone else ...tz .tz. Fine. We go then to the most unchallenged source, the Torah.

Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

Well everyone who is not a jew rejects what the rabbies have said, so ..must be put to death.

They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

We do not seek such a Lord. We must die, isn't it ?

Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)

So you doom .. the entire nonjewish world.

If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

But if this charge is true (that she wasn’t a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father’s house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB)

According to these strophes must die half of the world, all women.


DO YOU REALIZE THAT EVERY PHRASE IN YOUR RELIGION FROM THE MOST UNDOUBTED SOURCE CALLS FOR DEATH OF EVERYONE WHO IS NOT A FANATIC JEW ?!

And what are the Rabbinic interpretations on that, pray tell me...

[sumskilz]

You do not like your own Thalmud, it was the Thalmud of someone else ...tz .tz. Fine.

I'm not sure why you think anyone would believe your BS to be more credible than the Wikipedia article, but then here is a bit more on the source of those alleged quotes: Talmudic forgeries : a case study in anti-Jewish propaganda

Well everyone who is not a jew rejects what the rabbies have said, so ..must be put to death.

False, there were no rabbis at the time that was written and those law codes are specifically addressed to Jews only. More relevant, according to Rabbinic Judaism, non-Jews only need to follow the seven laws of Noah to be considered righteous.

We do not seek such a Lord. We must die, isn't it ?

That's a story, not a commandment, and not even a historical story.

So you doom .. the entire nonjewish world.

Me? I didn't write that book, but again that's a law code addressed only to Jews.

And what are the Rabbinic interpretations on that, pray tell me...

Rabbinic Judaism has all sorts of interpretations. Here are a few:

"The Talmud ruled out the admissibility of circumstantial evidence in cases which involved a capital crime. Two witnesses were required to testify that they saw the action with their own eyes. A man could not be found guilty of a capital crime through his own confession or through the testimony of immediate members of his family. The rabbis demanded a condition of cool premeditation in the act of crime before they would sanction the death penalty; the specific test on which they insisted was that the criminal be warned prior to the crime, and that the criminal indicate by responding to the warning, that he is fully aware of his deed, but that he is determined to go through with it. In effect this did away with the application of the death penalty. The rabbis were aware of this, and they declared openly that they found capital punishment repugnant to them… There is another reason which argues for the abolition of capital punishment. It is the fact of human fallibility. Too often we learn of people who were convicted of crimes and only later are new facts uncovered by which their innocence is established. The doors of the jail can be opened, in such cases we can partially undo the injustice. But the dead cannot be brought back to life again. We regard all forms of capital punishment as barbaric and obsolete."

~ Rabbi Ben Zion Bokser, Statement on capital punishment, 1960. Proceedings of the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards 1927-1970, Volume III, pp. 1537-1538

"So, at least theoretically, the Torah can be said to be pro-capital punishment. It is not morally wrong, in absolute terms, to put a murderer to death… However, things look rather different when we turn our attention to the practical realization of this seemingly harsh legislation. You may be aware that it was exceedingly difficult, in practice, to carry out the death penalty in Jewish society... I think it's clear that with regard to Jewish jurisprudence, the capital punishment outlined by the Written and Oral Torah, and as carried out by the greatest Sages from among our people (who were paragons of humility and humanity and not just scholarship, needless to say), did not remotely resemble the death penalty in modern America (or Texas). In theory, capital punishment is kosher; it's morally right, in the Torah's eyes. But we have seen that there was great concern—expressed both in the legislation of the Torah, and in the sentiments of some of our great Sages — regarding its practical implementation. It was carried out in ancient Israel, but only with great difficulty. Once in seventy years; not 135 in five and a half."

~ Rabbi Yosef Edelstein, Director of the Savannah Kollel

"In practice, however, these punishments were almost never invoked, and existed mainly as a deterrent and to indicate the seriousness of the sins for which they were prescribed. The rules of evidence and other safeguards that the Torah provides to protect the accused made it all but impossible to actually invoke these penalties… the system of judicial punishments could become brutal and barbaric unless administered in an atmosphere of the highest morality and piety. When these standards declined among the Jewish people, the Sanhedrin… voluntarily abolished this system of penalties."

~ Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, Handbook of Jewish Thought, Volume II, pp. 170-71