I'd be willing to bet you are referring to sections of the Talmud, which is the rabbinic law, or the Oral law. This was commentary in response to Christ and the New Covenant. Prior to Christ, there were no rabbis.
This s confusion about the religion, which is a matter to study by itself, but there's also the ethnic issue that the tribes of Israel were scattered, and the tribes of Judah were taken captive. The Jews of the Old Testament no longer exist, properly. I think might disagree with me on this (and I'd be willing to change my views if provided better evidence than what I've seen), but as far as I can tell, the current occupiers of Israel are not the tribe of Judah and are basically mutts of the Jewish diaspora including the Khazarian ashkenazim. I'm tempted to say that Zionism as it stands currently is a massive larp.
I recognize that the Talmud has shaped Jewish culture, law and belief for 3,500 years, however I was basing my argument largely on the Torah.
The Talmud is no older than 5th century A.D. It's very likely that the 'oral' law on which it is based is earlier, dating from the time of Christ. The Talmudic Jews would have you think that it was a second law given to Moses on Mt. Sinai. I very much doubt this.
If you edit a ping into your reply we don't get notified, you sexual pejorative.
The Talmud originally existed as a spoken history, passed down from one generation to the next, long before it was transcribed as a book.
(post is archived)