Anti-Jewish quotes

The following quotes come from an exchange of comments in my YouTube channel. A user copied a series of quotes (incorrect, as will be explained) from somewhere. Here are the quotes and the corresponding response for each. The video in question is this one:

"">What does Goyim mean?" And the core of the video is understanding the context in which our sages lived in the Talmudic era and, within that context, the phrases they said to distance the Jews from the Gentiles.

""Consider the Goyim as a bestial and ferocious animal, and treat him as such. Put your zeal and your ingenuity into destroying him." (Volume 3, Book 2, Chapter 4, Article 5)"

From which book? How can someone quote something without giving the title of the book!?

""The goyim are garbage; excrement." (Shulkan Aruch, with the words of Rabbi Josef Caro)

The Shulchan Aruch was written by Yosef Karo. It's a four-volume book, each volume containing over 500 chapters, some of which contain more than 50 laws. That's roughly 2,000 paragraphs, or halachot, in Hebrew: where is the citation mentioned?

""What a Jew steals from a goyim, he can keep."; "All non-Jewish children are animals." (Yebamoth 98a)

Here is the cited page: http://hebrewbooks.org/shas.aspx?mesechta=14&daf=98&format=pdf The Talmud makes no mention of the text cited on that page. It is interesting to note that it does indeed refer to the ancient Egyptians (of whom nothing remains) and describes them as terribly promiscuous, to the point of comparing them to donkeys whose sole interest is fornication.

""You Israelites are called men, while the nations of the world are not to be called men, but beasts." (Baba mezia, 114 c.1)

The Talmud does not have pages “c”. Only “a” and “b”. But no matter, let's go to the original passage: Kreitot, 6B: http://hebrewbooks.org/shas.aspx?mesechta=35&daf=6b&format=pdf Our sages taught: "Whoever anoints animals or utensils with anointing oil is exempt; Gentiles or the dead are also exempt. It makes sense to be exempt if one anoints animals or utensils, since the verse says, 'One should not anoint a man's skin,' and animals and utensils are not men. It also makes sense to be exempt if one anoints the dead, since once dead, one is no longer called a man, but dead. However, why is one exempt if one anoints a Gentile? Are they not men? No! For it is written, 'And you are my flock, my sheep; you are men,' meaning, you are called men, and Gentiles are not called men. Is it not written, '16,000 souls of men'? That excludes to animals. Isn't it written, "Will I not have mercy on Nineveh, etc."? That also excludes animals. With a little knowledge of the Talmud, it would be easy to understand that the Talmud is saying that the laws of purity and impurity, of the punishment of Karet (being cut off from the Jewish people), do not apply to Gentiles, but only to Jews. Why? Not because Gentiles are beasts, something the Talmud doesn't even say, but because the verse from which these laws are learned speaks of the Jewish people and calls them "men." Even the Talmud itself asks, "Are Gentiles not men?" Clearly they are. The laws of purity and impurity simply do not apply to them.

""Wherever the Jews arrive, they must become masters, and until we achieve absolute dominion, we must consider ourselves as exiles and prisoners; until we have seized everything, we must not cease to cry out: 'Alas, what torment! Alas, what humiliation!'" (Sanhedrin fol. 104, c.1)

The Talmud doesn't have a page "c"... Let's suppose it's "Side" 1, which would be 104a. There, an interesting story is cited that, perhaps with a bit of imagination, could be swapped with the lie that is quoted. The Talmud recounts that King Hezekiah showed the treasures of the First Temple to the envoys of the king of Babylon, and this led to the exile of the Jewish people there. Therefore, the Talmud says: anyone who invites a Gentile to a meal and serves them (during the meal) brings about exile for their children.

""The souls of non-Jews come from unclean spirits and are called pigs." (Jalkut Reubeni Gadol, 12 b)

http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14097&st=&pgnum=24 It doesn't say a single word of the quote mentioned...

""The best of the Gentiles must be killed." (Minor Tractates, Soferim 15, Rule 10 - Avoda Zara 26b, Tosafot beginning "and we do not bring him down").

https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/מסכת_סופרים_(דפוס_אמסטרדם_ת"ד)/טו In most versions, it doesn't say what is quoted. Here is the translated text: Aba Gurion in the name of Ish Tzadion: Do not teach your son to be a donkey driver, sailor, barber, pot seller, or merchant, because those trades lead to theft. Rabbi Yehuda says in his name: Donkey drivers are mostly wicked, sailors are mostly pious. The best of doctors go to Gehenna and the best of butchers are partners with Amalek. Most bastards are intelligent, most slaves are pleasant, most of the sons of the Patriarchs are shameful, and most children resemble their mother's brothers. Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai teaches: "The best of snakes, crush his head; the best of women is a witch; blessed is he who does God's will." Some versions add to the last phrase: "The best of the Egyptians, kill him" (see Rashi on Exodus 14:17). Some versions say, "The best of the idolaters in times of war, kill him." Other versions say, "The best of the idolaters, kill him." The idea behind this phrase is very simple: Are all women witches? Clearly not... so, just as that is an exaggeration, in the same way, the part of the phrase that says, "The best of the idolaters, kill him," is an exaggeration.

""To kill a goyim is the same as killing a wild animal." (Sanhedrin 59a)

http://hebrewbooks.org/shas.aspx?mesechta=24&daf=59&format=pdf It doesn't say anywhere what is quoted.

""What is a prostitute? Any non-Jewish woman" (Eben ha Ezer, 6, 8)

The quote is taken out of context. The book is the Shulchan Aruch, the Code of Jewish Law, Part Even HaEzer, Chapter 6, Law 8. http://www.ateret4u.com/online/f_01974_part_1.html#HtmpReportNum0005_L2 There, the text is discussing women whom a Kohen, a member of the Jewish priestly family, is forbidden to marry. Among these women, the Torah mentions a “Zonah,” which in modern Hebrew means prostitute, but in the Hebrew of the Torah, that is not its only meaning. And the text says: What is a “Zonah”? Any non-Jewish woman, or a Jewish woman who had relations with someone whom she could not marry, or a [Jewish] woman who had relations with a Jalal […] or a convert […]. Here, alongside the Gentile woman, Jewish law lists several Jewish women who are in the same category of “Zonah” as the Gentile woman. Therefore, it is not a place from which one can see the Torah's hatred of Gentiles, since, if that were the case, the Torah would be hating other Jews…

""Non-Jewish women are donkeys" (Berakoth 58a)

http://hebrewbooks.org/shas.aspx?mesechta=1&daf=58&format=pdf The Talmud is talking about Egyptian women in his time.

“Jews can use lies to deceive a gentile.” (Babha Kamma, 113a).

The Talmudic passage cited here is: http://hebrewbooks.org/shas.aspx?mesechta=21&daf=113&format=pdf. Let's analyze the section towards the end: The Talmud is discussing a tax collector (in Talmudic times) who decided to collect whatever he felt like without the king's permission. In this case, there is no obligation to pay the tax, as it is not a "legal" tax. The Talmud continues: We have studied: a Jew and an idolater (it is crucial to understand that this refers to an idolater of that time, when they had no respect for local (non-Jewish) laws and did as they pleased; see the commentary on Shita Mekubetzet, which restricts the following ruling to those times but NOT to the courts of present-day countries; interesting to note that this is a commentary from the year 1600…) who came before you for a trial. If you can declare the Jew innocent according to Jewish law, declare him innocent and say to him (the idolater): “These are our laws.” If you can declare the Jew innocent according to non-Jewish law, declare him innocent and say to him, “These are your laws.” And if you cannot, argue with him until you declare the Jew innocent. These are the words of Rabbi Ishmael. Rabbi Akiva says, “We do not argue with him until we declare the Jew innocent out of respect for the sanctification of God’s name.” The discussion continues to the beginning of the next page, where the Talmud concludes that this matter of "discussing" is only permissible in a case concerning relief from an unjust tax, and only if God's name is not profaned. I believe the argument is foolish and flawed.

“The Jews have to hide their hatred of Christians.” (Iore Dea 148, 12 h).

The cited text does not mention the word hate even once. Nor does it speak of Christians. Behold: אֶלָּא בְּאוֹתוֹ זְמַן, אֲבָל(ט) בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה אֵינָם בְּקִיאִים בְּטִיב אֱלִילִים, לְפִיכָךְ מֻתָּר לָשֵׂאת וְלָתֵת עִמָּהֶם בְּיוֹם חַגָּם וּלְהַלְווֹתָם וְכָל שְׁאָר דְּבָרִים. הגה: וַאֲפִלּוּ נוֹתְנִים הַמָּעוֹת לַכֹּהֲנִים, אֵין עוֹשִׂין מֵהֶם תִּקְרֹבֶת אוֹ נוֹי עֲבוֹדַת כּוֹכָבִים, אֶלָּא הַכֹּהֲנִים אוֹכְלִים וְשׁוֹתִים בּוֹ; וְעוֹד דְּאִית בָּזֶה מִשּׁוּם אֵיבָה אִם נִפְרֹשׁ עַצְמֵנוּ מֵהֶם בְּיוֹם חַגָּם, וְאָנוּ שְׁרוּיִם בֵּינֵיהֶם וּצְרִיכִים לָשֵׂאת וְלָתֵת עִמָּהֶם כָּל הַשָּׁנָה. וְלָכֵן אִם נִכְנַס לָעִיר וּמְצָאָם שְׂמֵחִים בְּיוֹם חַגָּם, יִשְׂמַח עִמָּהֶם מִשּׁוּם אֵיבָה דְּהָוֵי כְּמַחֲנִיף לָהֶם (הַכֹּל בַּטּוּר). וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם בַּעַל נֶפֶשׁ יַרְחִיק מִלִּשְׂמֹחַ עִמָּהֶם אִם יוּכַל לַעֲשׂוֹת שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיֶה לוֹ אֵיבָה בַּדָּבָר. (בֵּית יוֹסֵף בְּשֵׁם הָרַ''ן) וְכֵן אִם שׁוֹלֵחַ דּוֹרוֹן לְעוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה, בְּיוֹם [ח' שֶׁאַחַר נִיטֶל שֶׁקוֹרְאִים ניי' יֹאר] אֶחָד שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם סִימָן אִם יַגִּיעַ לָהֶם דּוֹרוֹן בֶּחָג הַהוּא, אִם אֶפְשָׁר לוֹ יִשְׁלַח לוֹ מִבָּעֶרֶב; וְאִם לֹא, יִשְׁלַח לוֹ בֶּחָג עַצְמוֹ (ת''ה סִימָן קצ''ה) . Interesting to note that it says precisely the opposite of what is proposed (the supposed Jewish hatred of Christianity). One can do business with non-Jews even on non-Jewish holidays, usually related to idolatry.

“A non-Jew who studies the Talmud or a Jew who helps him to do so must be condemned to death.” (Sanhedrin 59 ay Abohodan Zarah 8, 6)

http://hebrewbooks.org/shas.aspx?mesechta=24&daf=59&format=pdf The name of the Talmudic tractate is Avodah Zarah... Let's see: the Talmud in Sanhedrin says that a Gentile who studies Torah is liable to heavenly death (not as quoted). That is, no earthly rabbinical court will do anything with this Gentile. It is a matter between the Gentile and God. Why is he liable to heavenly death? Because it is written, "The Torah that Moses commanded us is the heritage of the congregation of Jacob," of Jacob and not of them. The Torah is not the heritage of the other peoples of the earth. The Meiri explains that the reason for this prohibition is that if the Gentile studies Torah like a Jew, he may be mistaken for a Jew and may lead other people astray with his ideas, which have nothing to do with Judaism. However, a Gentile can study everything related to the 7 universal precepts of Judaism for the other peoples of the earth.

""It is permitted to have sexual relations with a girl from the age of three." (Sanhedrin 54b) "A Jew shall have sex with a boy only and for as long as the boy is under nine years of age." (Sanhedrin 54b)

Here is the Talmudic page: http://hebrewbooks.org/shas.aspx?mesechta=24&daf=54b&format=pdf The Talmud is in the middle of the discussion about the prohibition of one man having relations with another. It never says the quoted phrases... It's interesting to note that the legal definition of sexual relations for a man is from the age of 9. That is, a boy under that age who has relations with a woman is not considered to have had relations. In the case of a woman, relations are defined as beginning at age 3. That is, if a man has relations with a girl under 3 years old, it is not considered relations. It is not written anywhere that it is a divine precept to have relations with these children; rather, the age of these children is being defined to judge with the death penalty anyone who has relations with them. The context is precisely the opposite of that cited by the anti-Semitic quote....

""A Jew can do whatever he wants to a non-Jewish woman. He can treat her like he would a piece of meat." (Nadarine 20 b, Schulman Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348)

Here is the cited page: http://hebrewbooks.org/shas.aspx?mesechta=16&daf=20b&format=pdf The Talmud is discussing what is permissible to do with one's wife in bed, that is, sexual relations, and in what manner it is permissible to carry them out. It never mentions non-Jewish women but only mentions one's own wife! That is, another Jewish woman! Regarding meat, it is interesting how they take things and twist them... the Talmud gives the example of what a man can do with his wife in bed (always with her consent, of course) using the idea of meat from the butcher shop, which can be eaten salted, or roasted, or cooked, or boiled... nothing to do with what is being cited...

""It is permitted to take the body and life of a Gentile (a non-Jew)." (Sepher ikkarim III, c. 25)

Here is the cited book and chapter: http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/mahshevt/ikarim/c10-2.htm# Of course, it says nothing about what is mentioned in the quote. It is interesting that the entire chapter is a response to a "wise man of Christian sages," as Rabbi Yosef Albo, author of the Sefer HaIkrim, calls him. The text exposes the falsity of Christianity and refutes the evidence they present. Some of Rabbi Yosef Albo's ideas in that chapter are very interesting, such as the New Testament authors' ignorance of the Torah texts. For example, Acts 7:14, where it speaks of Jacob's family going to Egypt with 75 souls... contrary to Genesis 46:27... In the same Acts 13:21, it says that Saul reigned for 40 years... when it was no more than 2 years (1 Samuel 13:1).

""The Christian birth rate must be materially diminished." (Zohar II, 64 b)

Here is the cited page: http://www.ateret4u.com/online/f_01149_part_5.html#HtmpReportNum0006_L2 It doesn't say a word about the Gentiles; it's talking about when Moses drew water from the rock and when the Jews complained that God was not among them...

Sanhedrin 59a: R. Jochamam says: the Christian who scrutinizes the law is guilty of death.

Here is the cited page: http://hebrewbooks.org/shas.aspx?mesechta=24&daf=59&format=pdf It's interesting to highlight a few points. The phrase is almost real, from Rabbi Yochanan (but ignorant Christians don't know how to spell his name). Nowhere does it say "Christian"... it says "idolater." The death it refers to is heavenly death, meaning no rabbinical court would apply the death penalty (besides the fact that there are no rabbinical courts today that apply that type of punishment).

Iove Dea 158, 2 Hagah: The transgressors who go over to the side of the Christians and who defile themselves among the Christians, giving worship to the stars and the planets as they do, are like those who transgress to anger God; therefore they should be thrown into the pit and not taken out.

The original is Iore Dea 158:2: http://www.ateret4u.com/online/f_01976_part_22.html#HtmpReportNum0019_L2 The text does not speak of Christians, but of idolatrous Gentiles. The phrase "thrown into a pit" is an expression that means that, as a community, we do not care about them. Interesting that the quote, on purpose, omits the end of the phrase: "וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם אִם בָּא לָשׁוּב, לֹא הֶחֱמִירוּ עָלָיו, שֶׁקָּשֶׁה לִפְרֹשׁ מֵהֶם וְחַיְשִׁינָן שֶׁלֹּא יַחֲזֹר לְסוּרוֹ": "And yet, if he comes to repent, we are not strict with him, because it is difficult to part with them, and we are concerned that he might stray again." Question: If we are to kill these people, how do we receive him when he comes to repent? Apparently, we would have killed him before he repented! The obvious answer is that it is not a commandment to kill anyone. The expression refers to not associating with such people.

Zohar I, 219 b: It is true that our captivity must last until the Christian princes who worship idols are wiped from the earth.

Let's look at the original phrase: אָמַר, וַדַּאי גָלוּתָא אִתְמְשַׁךְ, וְעַל דָּא (ס''א די) צִפֳּרֵי שְׁמַיָא לָא אַעֲדִיוּ, עַד דִּי שָׁלְטָנוּתָא דְּעַמִּין עוֹבְדֵי עֲבוֹדַת כּוֹכָבִים וּמַזָּלוֹת אַעֲדִיאוּ מִן עַלְמָא. וְאֵימָתַי, עַד דְּיִמְטֵי יוֹמָא הוּא אִתְעַר דִּינוֹי בְּעַלְמָא. דִּכְתִיב, (זכריה יד) Rabbi Yosei said: The exile is prolonged, and that is why the birds of the air do not move until the rule of the peoples who serve the stars and celestial bodies departs from the world. And when? When the day comes that the Holy One, blessed be He, awakens His judgment in the world, as it is written: "And it will be a day, it will be known to God, neither day nor night." Clearly, it does not say what they claim it says...

Sepher Or Israel 177 b. Blot out the life of the Christian and kill him. It is pleasing to the divine majesty like one who offers a gift of incense.

There are dozens of books titled Or Israel... some about Hanukkah laws, others about responsa, stories of Tzaddikim... It's easy to cite books and not be precise...

Zohar I, 38b and 39a. In the fourth palace of paradise are all those who mourned for Zion and Jerusalem and all those who have destroyed the remnants of the idolatrous nations... And as purple is the honorable and distinctive garment of God, so will be honored and distinguished all those who have killed the other idolatrous peoples.

Let's look at the original text: צִיּוֹן וִיְרוּשָׁלַ ם וְכָל אִנּוּן קָטוֹלֵי דִּשְׁאָר עַמִין עוֹבְדֵי In the fourth chamber are all those who mourned for Zion and Jerusalem, and all those killed by the other peoples of the earth who serve the stars and celestial bodies. How twisted can one be to distort the texts to say the exact opposite?

Zohar I, 160a אָמַר רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה בְּמָּה. פָּתַח וְאָמַר, (משלי כד) ''. מַאן מִלְחָמָה, דָּא מִלְחָמָה דְּהַהוּא סִטְרָא בִּישָׁא, דְּאִצְטְרִיךְ בַּר נָשׁ לַאֲגָחָא בֵּיהּ קְרָבָא, וּלְשַׁלְטָאָה עֲלוֹי וּלְאִשְׁתְּזָבָא מִנֵּיהּ. תָּא חֲזֵי, דְּיַעֲקֹב הָכִי אִשְׁתָּדַּל לְגַבֵּי עֵשָׂו, בְּגִין הַהוּא סִטְרָא דִילֵיהּ. לְאִתְחַכְּמָא עֲלוֹי וּלְמֵיזַל עִמֵּיהּ בְּעֲקִימוּ בְּכָל מַה דְּאִצְטְרִיךְ, בְּגִין לְשַׁלְטָאָה עֲלוֹי בְּרֵישָׁא וְסוֹפָא, וְכֹלָּא כְּדְקָא יְאוּת.

Let's look at the text and the context: Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Hezekiah were walking along the road and sharing words of Torah. They were discussing the struggle against the "other side," that is, one's own inclination toward evil within. Rabbi Hezekiah asked, "How does one fight against the 'other side'?" He answered with a verse from Proverbs 24:6, "For by schemes you will wage war." What war? It is the war against the evil side. For each person must fight against it, rule over it, and save themselves from it. Come and learn, Jacob, our patriarch, how he exerted himself against Esau, on his side (Esau), to overcome him with wisdom and deceive him as necessary, to rule over him from beginning to end, as was fitting. Clearly, he is not talking about Gentiles, Christians, or anything of the sort. He is saying that one must fight against one's own inner evil. And if it is necessary to "deceive" the evil within, let him do so, just as Jacob overcame his brother Esau...

When the Messiah arrives, every Jew will have 2800 slaves. Simeon Haddarsen 56D

There is no book called that... and automatically there is no page with that number and letter either. Regarding the quote, the Talmud in Shabbat 32b says: Reish Lakish says: Every person who observes the mitzvah of tzitzit will be worthy of being served by 2,800 slaves, as it is written: “Thus says the Lord of hosts, in those days they will take ten men from each language of the nations, and they will take one point from the Jew, saying, ‘Let us go with you, for we hear the Lord with you.’“ Rashi explains: There are 70 nations, 10 from each nation is 700 people, multiplied by the four points of the tzitzit, gives 2,800. The simple explanation of this verse has no relation to slaves; Rashi does not mention it in the Tanakh, nor do any of the classical commentators (Radak, Metzudat Tzion, Malbim, etc.). It is simply prophesying that the nations of the earth will desire to learn Judaism. Even Radak mentions that the number is not exact, as if to say, ”many "People." The Talmud does indeed refer to slaves from other nations, but no one knows what it means. Even the Rebbe, in a talk on Parashat Shlach in 1982, refers to this phrase from the Talmud and says that it's unclear why a person would want 2,800 slaves... and that only with the coming of the Messiah will the Messiah explain the phrase. Be that as it may, the Talmud is speaking about the importance of the mitzvah of tzitzit, not about Gentile slaves. But it's clear that whoever wants to misinterpret and generate hatred has the opportunity to do so, but in that case, it's a personal choice. There's always room for hatred; you don't need to go all the way to Zechariah, chapter 8, to hate. There are many earlier verses in the Tanakh...

Seph. Sp., 92,1

There is no book with that abbreviation...

Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 156.

First, in that chapter of the Jewish legal code, there are seven sections with extensive and lengthy notes... which ones do they refer to? This text discusses the laws concerning "whoever interferes with the work of their neighbor and whoever brings merchandise from another city." There is no law that implies hatred or resentment toward Gentiles... The only thing that could, with a great deal of imagination, be interpreted as hatred of Gentiles is the first note of the Ramo (R. Moshe Iserles), which states that a Gentile practicing a profession such as doctor, tailor, or any other type of work that generates a flow of people entering and leaving their home—a dwelling within a Jewish neighborhood (like the neighborhoods of antiquity, which were tenements sharing a common courtyard, with an exit to a larger neighborhood or the public domain)—should not be sold. But, as always, the anti-Jewish citation only mentions half the story: a Jew practicing those professions also cannot be rented out...

The Talmud Unmasked By Reverend IB Pranaitis Roman Catholic Priest, Doctor of Theology. Professor of Hebrew at the Imperial Ecclesiastical Academy of the Roman Catholic Church in Old St. Petersburg https://es.scribd.com/document/367962348/El-Talmud-desenmascarado-pdf

This book is cited by ignorant anti-Semites as a source to prove the supposed diabolical nature (what a paradox that for Judaism the devil doesn't exist...) of the Talmud and the Talmudic hatred of Christianity. This Wikipedia article explains who this reverend was and, primarily, cites a trial against a Jew in which he was called to testify as a Talmudic expert to determine the Jew's guilt or innocence. The Jew's defense asked him a series of questions in front of the judge, easily demonstrating this reverend's ignorance of the Talmud. How can someone write a book about something they know nothing about? Only unfounded hatred can foster something so absurd. The article is in English and is well-documented, with sources. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justinas_Pranaitis Let's cite just one example, taken at random from the book:

Chapter "Christians Must Be Harmed Indirectly" Article 1: Christians Must Be Harmed Directly

1. Good should not be done to Christians.

In Iore Dea (148,12 Hagah) it says:

""Therefore if you enter a town and find them celebrating a feast, you may intend to rejoice with them in order to hide your hatred. Those, however, who care about the salvation of their souls should keep away from such celebrations. You should make it known that it is a hateful thing to rejoice with them, if you can do so without incurring their enmity.""

Translation:

In Iore Dea (148,12,Note) he says: "Then, if you enter a city and find them celebrating a feast, you must pretend to rejoice with them to conceal your hatred. Those, however, who are concerned about the salvation of their souls should stay away from such celebrations. You must make it known that it is hateful to celebrate with them, if you can do so without incurring their enmity.""

Let's look at the original text: http://www.toratemetfreeware.com/online/f_01976_part_22.html#HtmpReportNum0009_L2

יב יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים שֶׁאֵין כָּל דְּבָרִים אֶלָּא בְּאוֹתוֹ זְמַן, אֲבָל (ט)בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה אֵינָם בְּקִיאִים בְּטִיב אֱלִילִים, לְפִיכָךְ מֻתָּר לָשֵׂאת וְלָתֵת עִמָּהֶם בְּיוֹם חַגָּם וּלְהַלְווֹתָם וְכָל שְׁאָר דְּבָרִים. הגה: וַאֲפִלּוּ נוֹתְנִים הַמָּעוֹת לַכֹּהֲנִים, אֵין עוֹשִׂין מֵהֶם תִּקְרֹבֶת אוֹ נוֹי עֲבוֹדַת כּוֹכָבִים, אֶלָּא הַכֹּהֲנִים אוֹכְלִים וְשׁוֹתִים בּוֹ; וְעוֹד דְּאִית בָּזֶה מִשּׁוּם אֵיבָה אִם נִפְרֹשׁ עַצְמֵנוּ מֵהֶם בְּיוֹם חַגָּם, וְאָנוּ שְׁרוּיִם בֵּינֵיהֶם וּצְרִיכִים לָשֵׂאת וְלָתֵת עִמָּהֶם כָּל הַשָּׁנָה. וְלָכֵן אִם נִכְנַס לָעִיר וּמְצָאָם שְׂמֵחִים בְּיוֹם חַגָּם, יִשְׂמַח עִמָּהֶם מִשּׁוּם אֵיבָה דְּהָוֵי כְּמַחֲנִיף לָהֶם (הַכֹּל בַּטּוּר). וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם בַּעַל נֶפֶשׁ יַרְחִיק מִלִּשְׂמֹחַ עִמָּהֶם אִם יוּכַל לַעֲשׂוֹת שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיֶה לוֹ אֵיבָה בַּדָּבָר. (בֵּית יוֹסֵף בְּשֵׁם הָרַ''ן) וְכֵן אִם שׁוֹלֵחַ דּוֹרוֹן לְעוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה, בְּיוֹם [ח' שֶׁאַחַר נִיטֶל שֶׁקוֹרְאִים ניי' יֹאר] אֶחָד שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם סִימָן אִם יַגִּיעַ לָהֶם דּוֹרוֹן בֶּחָג הַהוּא, אִם אֶפְשָׁר לוֹ יִשְׁלַח לוֹ מִבָּעֶרֶב; וְאִם לֹא, יִשְׁלַח לוֹ בֶּחָג עַצְמוֹ (ת''ה סִימָן קצ''ה) .

Before the translation, a brief introduction. This section of the Jewish Code of Laws (Shulchan Aruch) addresses the attitude a Jew should have toward the festivals of idolaters. It does not refer to Christians, but to idolaters. In fact, according to the author of the Shulchan Aruch, Christians are not idolaters... At the end of the section, the last paragraph reads:

12. Some say that all these matters applied in those times, but nowadays [the Gentiles] are not experts in idolatry, so one can do business with them on their festival day and lend them money and so on. Note: even if they give money to their priests, they do not make offerings or decorations to idols, but the priests eat and drink with that money. Furthermore, there is a problem here of hatred [from the Gentiles toward the Jews] if we separate ourselves from them on their festival day, and we live among them and need to trade with them all year round. Therefore, if you enter a city and find them rejoicing on their festival day, rejoice with them [to avoid] their hatred [against the Jews], for it will be as if you were flattering them. And yet, someone careful of their soul will refrain from rejoicing with them if they can do so without arousing their hatred [against the Jews].  

The idea behind Pranaitis' book is to misinterpret the text and, where it says "hate" it assumes that it speaks of hatred of the Jew against the Christian when, in reality, it is just the other way around... it speaks of hatred of the Gentile against the Jew.

The Akum (non-Jew) is like a dog. Yes: the holy scripture teaches to honor the dog more than a non-Jew." (Ereget Raschi Erod. 22, 30)

The book cited does not exist...

The Messiah will not come as long as there is a Jew who must endure being dominated by a non-Jew." (Shanhedrin 98a)

Here is the cited page: http://hebrewbooks.org/shas.aspx?mesechta=24&daf=98&format=pdf Of course, the supposed quote doesn't exist. It's interesting to note that the page does mention something similar, classically misinterpreted: "The Messiah will not come until this reign of Israel ends," which means (see Rashi's commentary) that the Jewish people will have no power or kingdom, even a weak one... precisely the opposite of the false quote.

The Virgin Mary is a prostitute. She, who was the descendant of princes and governors, played the harlot with the carpenters." (Sanhedrin 106a)

Here is the page: http://hebrewbooks.org/shas.aspx?mesechta=24&daf=106&format=pdf Of course, the quote is not there. However, it is very similar to another story in the Torah. We can see how anti-Jews invent stories based on other stories. The Torah story is about Cozbi bat Tzur, the Midianite princess who was promiscuous with Zimri ben Salu, leader of the tribe of Simeon (see Numbers 25:6, 14-15). This story appears in the Talmud, Sanhedrin 82b. But it has nothing to do with carpenters or anything like that. Clearly, they took a story and modified it to sound the way they wanted...

If we see an idolater (Gentile) being swept away or drowning in the river, we should not help him. If we see that his life is in danger, we should not help him. (Maimonides, Mishnah Torah, p. 184)

The Mishneh Torah is not divided into pages... that's a misquote. But let's go to the text in its original place: Mishneh Torah, Laws of Idolatry, Chapter 10, Law 1: "A covenant is not to be made with the seven nations to make peace with them and allow them to serve idolatry, as it is written (Deuteronomy 7:2): 'Do not make a covenant with them.' Either they return from their idolatry or we kill them. And it is forbidden to have mercy on them, as it is written (there): 'And do not show mercy to them.' Therefore, If you see one of them lost or sinking in the river, do not lift it out. If you see it lying about to die, do not save it, but actively destroying it or pushing it into a well, etc., is forbidden, because it is not waging war against us." Clearly he is not speaking of all Gentiles but only of the seven peoples of Canaan. This does not apply today... those peoples no longer exist.

If a Jew has a non-Jewish servant or employee who dies, the Jew should not be offered condolences, but rather be told: 'God will replace your loss as if one of your oxen or donkeys had died.'" (Jore dea 377, 1)

This quote is from the Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah, chapter 377, law 1. The text is talking about the slaves, not servants or indentured servants. In ancient times, slaves were the property of their owners, and their loss was merely an economic loss. Interestingly, the slave had the status of a "half-Jew," as he had partially converted and had certain obligations to God. Even so, he remained an economic possession. This law does not apply today since there are no slaves...

The property of a non-Jew is like unclaimed property. And whoever comes first, he takes possession of it. Talmud Bava Batra 54b

What an interesting quote! What's most interesting is that it's true. However, it's deliberately truncated. Let's look at the full phrase in the Talmud:

אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל נכסי עובד כוכבים הרי הן כמדבר כל המחזיק "" קני עד Rav Yehuda says in the name of Shmuel: The property of an idolater is like the desert; whoever possesses it, it belongs to him. Why? An idolater, when money comes into his hands, withdraws (from the property, that is, from being its owner). A Jew does not acquire until the document [of transaction] comes into his hands; therefore, the property of an idolater is like the desert; whoever possesses it, it belongs to him.

Clearly, the Talmud is talking about a sale... the non-Jew sold land to the Jew, received the corresponding money, but for some reason, a bill of sale has not yet been issued to the Jew. The Talmud is saying that because the Jew did not take possession, That land belongs to no one... it doesn't belong to the non-Jew because he already withdrew from it after receiving the money, it doesn't belong to the Jew because he hasn't acquired it yet... whoever takes possession of that land, it belongs to him.