Thus, the Galileans were racially and politically distinct from the Judeans.
 
Was this Galilean, religiously, what might today be called “a Jew”? The Judaist authorities, of course, deny that most strenuously of all; the statement, often heard from the platform and pulpit, might cause a riot in the synagogue.
 
It is difficult to see what responsible public men can mean when they use the phrase. There was in the time of Jesus no “Jewish” (or even Judahite or Judaist or Judean) religion. There was Jehovahism, and there were the various sects, Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes, which disputed violently between themselves and contended, around the temple, for power over the people. They were not only sects, but also political parties, and the most powerful of them were the Pharisees with their “oral traditions” of what God had said to Moses.
 
If today the Zionists are “the Jews” (and this is the claim accepted by all great Western nations), then the party which in Judea in the time of Jesus corresponded to the Zionists was that of the Pharisees. Jesus brought the whole weight of his attack to bear on these Pharisees. He also rebuked the Sadducees and the scribes. but the Gospels show that he held the Pharisees to be the foes of God and man and that he used an especial, scarifying scorn towards them. The things which he singled out for attack, in them and in their creed, are the very things which today's Zionists claim to be the identifying features of Jews, Jewishness and Judaism.
 
Religiously, Jesus seems beyond doubt to have been the opposite and adversary of all that which would make a literal Jew today or would have made a literal Pharisee then.
 
None can say with certainty who or what he was, and these suggestive statements by non-Jewish politicians ring as false as the derisive and mocking lampoons about “the bastard” which circulated in the Jewish ghettoes.
 
 
*Rabbi Stephen Wise, the leading Zionist organizer in the United States during the 1910-1950 period, used this phrase for the obvious political motive, of confusing non-Jewish hearers. Speaking to such an “inter-faith” meeting at the Carnegie Hall at Christmastide 1925, he stated “Jesus was a Jew, not a Christian” (Christianity was born with the death of Jesus).
For this he was excommunicated by the Orthodox Rabbis Society of the United States, but a Christian Ministers Association “hailed me as a brother”. Rabbi Wise adds the characteristic comment: “I know not which was more hurtful, the acceptance of me as a brother and welcoming me into the Christian fold, or the violent diatribe of the rabbis”.
 
The Controversy of Zion
by Douglas Reed, First Printing 1956, p. 59 ff.

My arguments about how Christianity isn’t Jewish and what led to the birth of communism are so ‘stupid’ every pagan I’ve spoke with has refused to respond to them. Funny how that works.

These people are prideful cowards who are so right and confident in their beliefs that they refuse to entertain any well thought out argument that challenges their claims. Because if Christianity isn’t Jewish, their whole system goes down the trash and then they have no other option but to become a Christian. This is why they are so scared.

Shows you where the truth lies doesn’t it.

No fuckin way. Did a bit of digging into Robert Sepehr's family line. He's not Iranian.

Robert Sepehr is Jewish. Can't say that it's surprising.

Oh nonononono

Our critics assert that the sacred rabbinic texts do not constitute law (Halakhah) but only commentary and debate. The truth is very different: Halakhah is made up of the traditions found in the rabbinic texts. Those texts as a whole comprise the Oral Law, what Josephus termed, paradôsis  (“tradition”). Rabbinic law is grounded in the traditions of men, just as Jesus said (cf. Mark 7; Matthew 15). Those traditions consist of extra-Biblical superstitions and occultism, self-worship, racist hatred for non-Jews and sheer nonsense.”

- Michael Hoffman

"...there are no Jews to be met with who adhere to the Old Bible without Talmud-Traditions ...the word Talmud (which makes so great a Noise in the World) it may suffice to observe, that by a sort of Metonymy, it signifies the Book containing the main Doctrines of the Jews...For it is very observable, that the Talmud is oftener brought in Vindication of their religion, than Moses, the Prophets, and Holy Writings: insomuch that they make it, and not the Old Bible, the touchstone of their doctrine, and that into which they resolve the decision of all their cases…the Talmud of Babylon...this later hath obtain’d public honor and belief among them: and at this day is universally received as the authentic body of their Law. 

"The first among Christians who took more solemn cognizance of the Talmud, was Justinian the Emperor, who about the 551 year of Christ, gave Toleration to the Jews to read the Sacred Bible in their synagogues in the Greek Tongue; but utterly prohibited them the reading of the Mishnah, as being neither adjoyned to the Sacred Books, nor delivered from above to the Prophets; but a mere invention of earthly men, who had nothing of Heaven in them. ...the Mishnah Torah was composed out of the kabbalistics and anagogics of the Jews...allegorical interpretations, pretended to be derived from Moses. When the Jews were setled in Italy and France, the bishops of Rome began to take severe cognizance of the Talmud. For Pope Innocent IV. commanded all the copies thereof that could be found in France to be burned, because it contained manifest blasphemies against God, Christ, and the Virgin Mary, inextricable abuses, erroneous and unheard-of fooleries.'

— Lancelot Addison (1632-1703), The present State of the Jews (more particularly relating to those in Barbary) wherein is contained an exact account of their customs, secular and religious : to which is annexed a summary discourse of the Misna, Talmud, and Gemara (London: Printed by J.C. for William Crooke and to be sold by John Courtney, 1675), pp. 239-240; 244; 248-249.

Since you are all aware by now the inferior position that Scripture holds in Rabbinic Judaism—in general and compared to the Oral Torah (Talmud, Mishnah, Midrash, Kabbalah, Haggadah, Aggadah, homiletical interpretation of Rabbis)—let’s take a closer look about what the Rabbis have to say about the Old Testament prophets, kings and patriarchs.

First I shall start with these verse from the Talmud:

“Since God already gave the Torah to the Jewish people on Mt. Sinai we no longer pay attention to heavenly voices. God must submit to the decisions of a majority vote of the rabbis.” — BT Bava Metzia 59b

“The Holy One, Blessed be He, speaks Torah out of the mouths of all rabbis.”

— Haggadah 15b

The non-Biblical basis of Judaism is acknowledged in the Mishnah itself: 

“The laws concerning the Sabbath, Festal-offerings and acts of trespass are as mountains hanging by a hair, for they have scant Scriptural basis but many laws” —Mishnah Hagiga i, 8.

Now, onto the nonsense:

In BT Menachot 29b, the rabbis claim that God transported Moses into the future, to the yeshiva of the second-century Rabbi Akiva. Moses is depicted as sitting at the back of the class, listening  to the day's lesson, which is on the Mosaic law. Yet Moses can't understand the teaching that is being imparted by Rabbi Akiva! Here the Gemara itself is admitting that Talmudic Judaism had so diluted and distorted the Pentateuch with rabbinic traditions that Moses himself no longer recognized the teaching ascribed to him.

It is written in the Babylonian Talmud that the prophet Isaiah was justifiably killed for stating that the Israelites had unclean lips. 
—BT Yebamoth 49b.

About Noah, the Holy Bible teaches: Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation. Noah walked with God. (Genesis 6:9).

The Talmud falsely interprets the phrase “in his generation” to mean that in any other generation Noah would not be holy or significant: "Noah was only righteous in his generation; had he lived in the generation of Abraham, he would not have been considered significant at all.” [B.T. Sanhedrin 108a]

In Hebrew “blameless" denotes without flaw. Noah is a precursor of Abraham, not less than Abraham. What is required of Noah, God also requires of Abraham: to walk before Him and be blameless. The Talmud is wrong to denigrate Noah. And it gets worse. The rabbinic Midrash declares that no good was found in Noah (Midrash Rabbah: Genesis I [Soncino 1983, vol. 1], p. 289). This Midrash also teaches that Noah was an alcoholic who was castrated when he was on his way to have coitus. (Midrash Rabbah: Genesis I [Soncino 1983, vol. 1], pp. 290-291; 293). These texts give evidence for the fact that Judaism’s "Noahide Laws” are not a reference to the Biblical Noah, despite public dissimulation to the contrary. Judaism’s misnamed "Noahide Laws" are a Talmudic subterfuge. They are not of Noah or the Old Testament.

A typical example of Talmudic nonsense about Biblical patriarchs concerns King Solomon and the sacred Temple. Who could believe such rubbish about King Solomon and God's Temple except the self-deluding denizens of the synagogue? The Babylonian Talmud teaches that "hobgoblins" (mischievous devils) helped to build the Temple, and that King Solomon was succeeded as King of Israel not by Rehoboam as the Bible says, but by Ashmodeus, the king of the demons, as the Talmud says.

The sages inform us that "everyone helped in the construction of this Temple - even the spirits, the hobgoblins, the angels" (Shir Hashirim Rabba 1:5).

 ...Thereafter, although he (Solomon) is successful politically and militarily, his inner world begins to crumble till finally he is "replaced" by Ashmodeus, King of the underworld spirits (Talmud, Gittin 68b).

Yebamoth 63a also claims that Adam had sexual intercourse with all the animals in the Garden of Eden, and in Zohar 1:55a the Rabbis say that Adam engendered female demons from his spilled semen and that Eve copulated with Satan and conceived Cain.

Rabbi Chabad-Lubavitch (the founder of Hasidism) in his sicko ramblings also claims that Isaac was actually a female soul born into a male’s body until he prayed to god so that god would swap his soul from the soul of Eve to that of Abel (Source) (Source)

BT Shabbat 15c (also cf. Baba Metzia 33A), comes also gives three levels of study, ranked from lowest to highest, pointing to the place scripture has in Judaism:

A. "He who occupies himself with Scripture gains merit that is no merit.

B. "He who occupies himself with Mishnah gains merit for which people receive a reward.

C. "He who occupies himself with Talmud—there is no source of merit greater than this.”

Here I conclude with Rabbi Yehiel Ben Joseph who says:

“Without the Talmud, we would not be able to understand passages in the Bible... God has handed this authority to the sages and tradition is a necessity as well as scripture. The Sages also made enactments of their own... anyone who does not study the Talmud cannot understand Scripture."

Some of you may ask, well why do they try so hard to cling to scripture?

It’s all a part of the Jewish plot to make their religion seem like it has some sort of basis in the original Written Torah so it doesn’t seem totally man-made and nonsensical.

They try so hard to hide all of this, but all the goyim will know the truth about this sicko religion soon enough. You will not fool us with your tricks, Jews. We will not let you try and get away with making it seem like Rabbinic Judaism has any basis in scripture at all.

I want you to all know as well, that when a Jew like Uriel da Costa tried to place the Written Torah in a higher position than the ‘wisdom of the sages’, he was condemned by the Rabbinate on multiple occasions.