The Time of Awakening

IDIC logo

I have detailed in previous posts about the problems with the Noahide movement. In this post, I will offer a solution.

In order to regain control of the Noahide movement, to wrest authority from the rabbis who have turned it into a Jewish sect (or, in the case of the gerrings, a cult), we need to first establish a paradigm for the Noahide Code.

First of all, we need to understand that every man, woman and child who is not Jewish (according to halakha) is a Noahide. That means that every non-Jew is under the Noahide Law whether they accept it or not. This means the issue is not conversion but teshuvah. You don’t have to walk down the aisle and shake the rabbi’s hand to become a Noahide. You already are a Noahide.

The Noahide Law is a moral and legal code. Since the Noahide prohibition of idolatry is based on the mitzvah to believe in no divinity but God [Shemos 20:3], the Noahide Law is neither a religion nor the basis for religion. There are no positive commandments for prayer, sacrifice, keeping kosher, Yom Tov or any other religious observances associated with Israel’s service to Hashem. Most importantly, there is no positive commandment for a non-Jew (Noahide) to “believe in God.” This means that the key to becoming a frum Noahide is not belief but observance.

The Noahide Law is meant to be all-inclusive. This means that the Noahide Code must be adaptable and accessible to every society and every culture, while on the individual level it should appeal to everyone from the most spiritual God-fearer to the most hard-boiled atheist. Up to now, the Noahide Law has been confined to a narrow demographic. The target audience has been those coming out of organized religion, primarily evangelistic ex-Christians. This approach is wrong, and it has crippled the growth of acceptance and availability of the Noahide Law.

According to the Talmud [Chullim 33a] as well as certain rabbinic authorities such as Ramban— “[The Noahide Law should be] comparable to the civil laws about which Israel was commanded,” (Ramban’s commentary to Bereishis 34:13)—the Noahide law is not to be as strict or exact as Jewish law.

The details of the Noahide Law are to be worked out by the Noahides themselves, not the rabbis. “Non-Jews have to learn Torah and they cannot rely on asking Jews questions about each and every detail what to do, especially since there is no assumption that a Jew will know all the details of the seven Bnei Noah commandments for there are a number of differences and modifications concerning their own obligations.”—Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, Kol Baye Olam. [taken from Elisheva Barre’s Torah for Gentiles.] Also, “דּרכים are the main roads and ארחות are its branches…the nations will say, ‘Although we have only been taught the דּרכים — the fundamentals of the religion—nevertheless we will strive to learn its details on our own—בּארחתיו ונלכה)'”—Malbim, Isaiah 2:3). Stavsky, Trei Asar, Vol. II, 29. What this means is that detailed books about Noahide “prayers” and Noahide “Shulchan Aruchs” are misguided attempts to develop the Noahide Law into a religious sect of Judaism.

Since the Noahide Law is not a religion, and since it is not to be as strict or as exact as Jewish Law, and since Noahides are supposed to work out the details themselves, the only logical recourse is to develop the Noahide Code as a philosophy.

Reformatting the Noahide Code as a philosophy has many advantages. For starters, as an all-inclusive philosophy, it would be the antithesis of Judaism; it would preclude interference from the rabbis and revert control to the Noahides where it belongs. As a philosophy instead of a strict halakhic system, the Noahide Code would be more flexible to the many different cultures and individuals. As a “secular” (i.e., non-religious) Torah-based philosophy, it would provide a viable alternative to the divisive philosophies of religion and scientism which have been the source of so much umbrage and angst in Western culture.

The one caveat is that it would be a Torah-based philosophy, unlike any existing Western or Eastern philosophies. The scope of this philosophy will cover all seven areas of Noahide Law. It would be a guide to not only individual behavior, but encompassing fields such as government, law, economics, marriage and the environment.

Although it is a Torah-based philosophy grounded on the Seven Laws, it is going to break with current Noahide tradition. It will not be about “belief,” or any religious doctrine as Noahide Law has been presented in the past. Even the name of this philosophy will not reference the term “Noahide.”

This philosophy is not simply an abstract concept, but a labor of love and duty which I have been developing for the past few years. It is a new awakening of the truths of the Torah molded into a philosophy which will be accessable to all.

Advertisements
Standard

11 thoughts on “The Time of Awakening

  1. Elisheva Barre says:

    WOW! For sure Judaism is not a religion in the sense of cult, and for sure there is in Judaism a world view one might call philosophic. But your proposition is unfeasible, not to say… dangerous. I understand your intention is good and as such praiseworthy, but I have to point out to you that you are driving in the wrong direction.
    Indeed, “Reformating the Noahide Code” is denying the format God prescribed, and you would not even know of a Noahide Code if the Jewish tradition had not told you of it and kept it… for you!!! The “most hard-boiled atheist” could NOT be following the Noahide Code which is God-given!!! And a “TORAH-based philosophy” CANNOT be “the antethesis of Judaism”!!!
    During history, many have tried to divert the Torah and turn it into other religions (Christianity and Islam), other doctrines (Karaism), and other philosophies (Freemasonry)… it does not work! If you wish an awakening and a future, YOU HAVE TO RETURN TO THE SOURCE!!!!!!!

    • The “format” of the Noahide Law is found in the Talmud (Sanhedrin 56a–60a) which IS the “source.” It is limited to what a non-Jew can legally be held accountable for in a beis din. That’s it. No religion. It’s purely a moral and legal framework. As I mentioned, the positive commandment to believe in God is not a part of the Noahide Law. An atheist therefore can, halakhically speaking, be an observant Noahide, what Rambam calls “the wise of the nations,” one who comes to recognize and accept the Seven Laws through logic and reason (philosophy.)
      You mention the problems with organized religions such as Christianity and Islam as well as other groups such as Freemasonry. I am not the one who is turning the Noahide Law into a religion; the rabbis are doing that. The best way to keep a philosophy from turning into a religion is to keep religion out of it altogether. And Freemasonry is not a Torah-based philosophy. It began in Christian Europe at the end of the fourteenth century with organizations of stonemasons during the time when Jews were kept of of the guilds.
      A Torah-based philosophy that is neither based on a belief in God nor based on strict halakha is indeed the antithesis of Judaism.

  2. Elisheva Barre says:

    I will be more specific in relating to your article as well as your reply:

    1. Indeed, Judaism is not a religion – there is not even a word for that in Hebrew. But it does dictate, among all the other moral, social, economic etc obligations, to serve the One who legislated “Judaism” at Sinai. This service has a protocol (what you call “religion” for its rituals and rites) for Jews but NOT for Bnei Noah, because for Jews it is a national obligation whereas BN have only individual obligations, so no rituals (see Prayer and Sacrifices in Chapter 13).
    2. Indeed, every man is a Ben Noah in the genealogical sense “whether he accepts it or not” but he is not a Noahide in the legal sense UNLESS he accepts it.
    3. Indeed, the Noahide Code does not include the obligation to believe in God (I briefly give a reason for that at the end of the section “Who prohibits Idolatry?” of Chapter 10) but this does not make of the Noahide Code a godless law since it is God Himself who dictated it!
    Under that Code, the atheist is a blasphemer for denying the existence of God – so even if he were the wisest of men on earth, he would never receive the status of Ben Noah, and in case he already received it, he would be put to death. What the Rambam calls “the wise of the nations” are NOT Bnei Noah – whom he calls in this law “resident strangers” because this legal status is applicable only in our land.
    4. Indeed, “detailed books about Noahide prayers and Noahide Shulchan Aruchs are misguided attempts”, NOT because “the Noahides are supposed to work out the details of the laws themselves” but because these attempts are CONTRARY to Law!
    5. The few pages you mention from Tractate Sanhedrin are themselves based on sources, knowledge and premises Israel received at Sinai some 15 centuries before the Talmud was written down. If you think “that’s it”, you seriously missed the point of the Talmudic discussion.
    6. However misguiding some rabbis may be who teach these laws, it does not give a Ben Noah the right to put himself in their place and amend or adapt the Noahide Code. If there is a problem, it is not where you see it and the solution you offer is a serious deviation.
    After suggesting to “reformat the Noahide Code as a philosophy” and “break with the Noahide tradition” … you intuitively say something quite right, that “the name of this philosophy will not reference the term “Noahide”. Indeed, it shouldn’t! But WHY not?!
    I hope you see the problem with your solution. Of course, you may accept or reject what I pointed out, the choice is entirely yours!

  3. Elisheva Barre says:

    PS – Point 4: Such codifications are contrary to Law because the Sages did NOT codify them. They did not put any words of prayer in the mouth of a Ben Noah, and they did not finalize a Code for Bnei Noah. Any attempt to do what the Sages did not do is a denial of the authority they received by ordination at Sinai and that is why it is contrary to Law.
    Point 3: In this paragraph, “Gentile” is meant in the general sense, and we are not concerned whether if a Gentiles does, or does not believe in God. But if he is a Ben Noah (having taken upon himself his Torah obligation), denying he does so because God dictated these laws to Moses IS a blasphemy.

  4. “Indeed, Judaism is not a religion – there is not even a word for that in Hebrew.”
    A point I make in my book “Secular by Design” on page 25.

    “Indeed, every man is a Ben Noah in the genealogical sense ‘whether he accepts it or not’ but he is not a Noahide in the legal sense UNLESS he accepts it.”
    Which is my point of “teshuvah” and not “conversion” for the Noahide.

    “Under that Code, the atheist is a blasphemer for denying the existence of God – so even if he were the wisest of men on earth, he would never receive the status of Ben Noah, and in case he already received it, he would be put to death. What the Rambam calls ‘the wise of the nations’ are NOT Bnei Noah – whom he calls in this law ‘resident strangers’ because this legal status is applicable only in our land.”
    The atheist violates the law of blasphemy only if he or she curses God… “May Yose smite Yose.” And the death penalty, although a Noahide is liable, is highly unlikely outside Eretz Yisrael “because this legal status is applicable only in our land.”

    “Indeed, ‘detailed books about Noahide prayers and Noahide Shulchan Aruchs are misguided attempts’, NOT because ‘the Noahides are supposed to work out the details of the laws themselves’ but because these attempts are CONTRARY to Law!”
    They are misguided attempts because Noahide Law is nowhere as strict or exact as Jewish Law. These books are contrary to the Law precisely BECAUSE Noahides are supposed to work out the details themselves. The rabbis are overstepping their authority—besides the obvious problem that they are pushing laws on Noahides that are not part of the Seven.

    “The few pages you mention from Tractate Sanhedrin are themselves based on sources, knowledge and premises Israel received at Sinai some 15 centuries before the Talmud was written down. If you think ‘that’s it’, you seriously missed the point of the Talmudic discussion.”
    The Talmudic discussion about Noahide Law in Sanhedrin 56a–60a entirely has to do with what a Noahide can be held accountable for in a Beis Din in Eretz Yisrael. That’s the point. It does not presume to tell Noahides what to do in their own sovereign lands.

    “However misguiding some rabbis may be who teach these laws, it does not give a Ben Noah the right to put himself in their place and amend or adapt the Noahide Code. If there is a problem, it is not where you see it and the solution you offer is a serious deviation.”
    The problem is that the rabbis have ZERO authority over Noahides outside Eretz Yisrael. It is the rabbis who are attempting to “amend and adapt” the Noahide Law. Both Ravad and Ramban were of the opinion that Israel cannot enforce the Noahide Law upon neighboring nations that Israel conquers militarily, let alone Gentile nations over which it has no control (cf. Ravad on Malachim 6:1 and Issura Beah 12:7–8; Ramban’s commentary on Bereishis 26:5, Devirim 20:1, 11; Tosafot Avoda Zara 26b). What the Noahides are to “amend” is our Constitution and legal system; our “secular” laws must be based on Noahide Law.

    “After suggesting to ‘reformat the Noahide Code as a philosophy’ and ‘break with the Noahide tradition’ … you intuitively say something quite right, that “the name of this philosophy will not reference the term “Noahide”. Indeed, it shouldn’t! But WHY not?!”
    Sorry; I meant the “Noahide tradition” as it has been taught by the rabbis for the past 25 years. What the rabbis are pushing on Noahides is Judaism. They are not teaching Noahide Law. As for the term “Noahide,” this word now carries connotations of a religious nature. The rabbis are turning the “Noahide” into a religious sect of Judaism. Rambam himself refers to those who accept the laws out of intellectual conviction as “the wise of the nations,” not “Noahides.”

    “Such codifications are contrary to Law because the Sages did NOT codify them. They did not put any words of prayer in the mouth of a Ben Noah, and they did not finalize a Code for Bnei Noah. Any attempt to do what the Sages did not do is a denial of the authority they received by ordination at Sinai and that is why it is contrary to Law.”
    I agree 100%. This is exactly why works such as Weiner’s “The Divine Code” and his “Prayers, Blessings, Principles of Faith, and Divine Service for Noahides” along with other prayer books for Noahides such as “Brit Olam” and “Service From the Heart” are so wrong-headed. This criticism also includes the three chapters of Rambam’s Mishna Torah (Hilchot Melachim, chs. 8–10) that was an attempt to codify the Seven Laws.

    “But if he is a Ben Noah (having taken upon himself his Torah obligation), denying he does so because God dictated these laws to Moses IS a blasphemy.”
    It is a blasphemy to Jews. It is not a blasphemy for Noahides (cf. above.) Making “belief in God” a prerequisite to accepting the Seven Laws is too much like the Christian doctrine of “justification by faith.” This is putting the Noahide Code into a religious format. Chief Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook said that “a gentile who observes the seven Noahide laws through the rational process—rather than through a belief that these commandments were ‘given by God’—merits not only a share in the world-to-come but also recognition as being one ‘of their wise men.’” Konvitz, Torah & Constitution, 115.
    I hope you see the solution with this problem.

  5. Elisheva Barre says:

    I will check what one does with this atheist who infiltrated our country under the status of BN and is now about to undermine our faith.

    The procedures of indictment are less stringent for BN (for instance no warning is necessary) so in fact it makes it a more severe law because a BN will be indicted where a Jew will not, but that does NOT make the Noahide Law “less exact” – which would mean it is not just!!! The measurements are simply different.

    I really don’t know where you get it from that “Noahides are supposed to work out the details [of their laws] themselves”. Wherefrom did this BN receive the halachic authority to do that? The points of law that have not been determined will be finalized by the Sanhedrin when it will be restored. In the meantime, the decision depends on rabbis who have the knowledge. If you don’t like this one, knock on the door of that one, and if you don’t get an answer to your question, just REFRAIN from a deed you do not know for sure is permitted. That is the right procedure. Inn any case as things stand today, you will always find a so-called rabbi who will OK anything if if that is what you want him to do… but it does not make it legal!!!

    Rabbis have authority only over the one who wants to listen to their instructions. If you had not sat with rabbis, you would not know the amount you know today and it is not nice to be ungrateful.

    Of course “Sanhedrin 56a–60a … does not presume to tell Noahides what to do in their own sovereign lands”, because Israel has no jurisdiction over there… In the days of Messiah, this will probably change.

    If as you say the rabbis “have ZERO authority over Noahides outside Eretz Yisrael” (even those who teach Noahides in the U.S.?), then certainly Noahides have ZERO right to call themselves “Noahides” outside of Eretz Israel. There, there are only Gentiles, some are good people and others no so good…

    As you probably know, the exile obliged Jews to “amend and adapt” many stipulations of our Law in order to escape Inquisitions. That was a situation of duress. Your persistent lashing and bashing of our rabbis is an ignorance of Jewish history.

    Gentiles are welcome to “amend” their Constitution and legal system any way they please and “secularize” whatever they want. They are not accountable under Jewish law.

    “…I meant the Noahide tradition as it has been taught by the rabbis for the past 25 years…” O boy are you young! I am 3.500 years old and I have already seen it all! Maybe one day you will catch up with me…

    You “agree 100%” but you wrap “The Divine Code” and “Brit Olam” with the three chapters of Rambam’s Mishna Torah, which shows you do not know the difference. Oh well… I am not selling you anything.

    Konvitz, Torah & Constitution, 115 quotes Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook who misquotes the Rambam, because Rambam’s manuscripts have been tampered with. Today, everybody in Israel studies Rambam in a correct edition of the original text.

    I will not relate to the passages that express personal opinions. I do not argue opinions, but facts of the law. You acquired knowledge, but in my humble opinion, it is not constructed upon sound foundations.

    I am not rereading. I hope there are notmistakes.

  6. “I will check what one does with this atheist who infiltrated our country under the status of BN and is now about to undermine our faith.”

    I am not undermining anything. I am simply following halakha. And for the Noahide, the halakha of idolatry is clear. The prohibition of idolatry has to do with a non-Jew NOT worshiping any other god but Hashem. There is no positive commandment to believe in God as there is for the Jew. You can certainly believe in Hashem if you want, but it is not a commandment. You have your path, we have ours.

    “The procedures of indictment are less stringent for BN (for instance no warning is necessary) so in fact it makes it a more severe law because a BN will be indicted where a Jew will not, but that does NOT make the Noahide Law “less exact” – which would mean it is not just!!! The measurements are simply different.”

    According to the Talmud, Chullim 33a, this is not so. Noahide Law cannot be as severe or exact as Jewish Law. Outside of Eretz Yisrael, the Noahide Law provides a flexibility according to the culture involved.

    “I really don’t know where you get it from that “Noahides are supposed to work out the details [of their laws] themselves”. Wherefrom did this BN receive the halachic authority to do that?”

    How about a quote from your own book? “The details of the Noahide Law are to be worked out by the Noahides themselves, not the rabbis. ‘Non-Jews have to learn Torah and they cannot rely on asking Jews questions about each and every detail what to do, especially since there is no assumption that a Jew will know all the details of the seven Bnei Noah commandments for there are a number of differences and modifications concerning their own obligations.’—Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, Kol Baye Olam.” [taken from Elisheva Barre’s Torah for Gentiles.]
    Also, “דּרכים are the main roads and ארחות are its branches…the nations will say, ‘Although we have only been taught the דּרכים — the fundamentals of the religion—nevertheless we will strive to learn its details on our own—בּארחתיו ונלכה)’”—Malbim, Isaiah 2:3). Stavsky, Trei Asar, Vol. II, 29.

    “The points of law that have not been determined will be finalized by the Sanhedrin when it will be restored.”

    Since no one knows when that will happen, why wait for a miracle? It could be decades, even centuries from now when this happens. And according to rabbinic commentary on Bereishis when Jacob and his family were about to encounter Esav and his men, one should do everything possible himself and not rely on a miracle to save himself.

    “In the meantime, the decision depends on rabbis who have the knowledge.”

    The problem isn’t about knowledge, it is about understanding. I explained in a previous post the problems rabbis have understanding Noahide Law. It is clear that the rabbis who are involved with the Noahide movement do not understand it, which is why they are teaching Judaism instead of Noahide Law.

    “If you don’t like this one, knock on the door of that one, and if you don’t get an answer to your question, just REFRAIN from a deed you do not know for sure is permitted.”

    The Noahide Law is not about “deeds that are permitted.” The Noahide Laws are about prohibitions, with the exception of Dinim.

    “That is the right procedure. Inn any case as things stand today, you will always find a so-called rabbi who will OK anything if if that is what you want him to do… but it does not make it legal!!!”

    Again, the focus is on sovereign non-Jewish legal systems and governments, areas which rabbis have no authority at all. Interference in non-Jewish legal systems is a violation of Dina D’Malkhuta Dina.

    “Rabbis have authority only over the one who wants to listen to their instructions. If you had not sat with rabbis, you would not know the amount you know today and it is not nice to be ungrateful.”

    Why do you assume I am ungrateful? I am very grateful, but I also understand their limits of their knowledge and understanding. I have spoken to many rabbis who understand that a “hands-off” policy is the best, since Noahides are having to deal with their own laws.

    “In the days of Messiah, this will probably change.”

    He’s not here yet. And if this isn’t the right shemitot, he won’t be coming this go around.

    “If as you say the rabbis “have ZERO authority over Noahides outside Eretz Yisrael” (even those who teach Noahides in the U.S.?), then certainly Noahides have ZERO right to call themselves “Noahides” outside of Eretz Israel.”

    I fail to see the logic of this statement. Of course we can call ourselves Noahides if we want. We follow Noahide Law. We could call ourselves purple monkey dishwashers if we wanted to.

    “As you probably know, the exile obliged Jews to “amend and adapt” many stipulations of our Law in order to escape Inquisitions. That was a situation of duress. Your persistent lashing and bashing of our rabbis is an ignorance of Jewish history.”

    If you had read my books, you would know I have nothing but praise and admiration for what the rabbis have accomplished during the Esuvian exile. My criticisms are limited to the rabbis who are running the Noahide Movement into the ground. And I can assure you that what I say about the rabbis is quite mild compared to what I have heard rabbis say about other rabbis they disagree with.

    “Gentiles are welcome to “amend” their Constitution and legal system any way they please and “secularize” whatever they want. They are not accountable under Jewish law.”

    The Noahides are not under Jewish law whatsoever. They are under Noahide Law. And the teaching about “amending” our “secular” legal system is based on Nachmonides, the Ramban. Cf. p. 408 of Secular by Design.

    “O boy are you young! I am 3.500 years old and I have already seen it all! Maybe one day you will catch up with me…”

    The reason I am catching up to you is that I’ve already lapped the field. Only a few rabbis had any knowledge of the Noahide Law before 25 years ago. This is a relatively new area of study for them. Sure, they KNEW about the Seven Laws, but they never studied it in depth.

    “You “agree 100%” but you wrap “The Divine Code” and “Brit Olam” with the three chapters of Rambam’s Mishna Torah, which shows you do not know the difference. Oh well… I am not selling you anything.”

    Good, because I’ve already read them. If you read my earlier blog posts, and my book, you will see I’m not a big fan of Rambam’s interpretation and codification of the Noahide Law. In fact, I see it as one of the major problems Noahides are having right now.

    “Konvitz, Torah & Constitution, 115 quotes Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook who misquotes the Rambam, because Rambam’s manuscripts have been tampered with. Today, everybody in Israel studies Rambam in a correct edition of the original text.”

    The quote is from the Yeminite version, which is the “correct” one. The phrase “but NOT of their wise men” is from the Vilna edition, which was tampered with by Christian censors.

    “You acquired knowledge, but in my humble opinion, it is not constructed upon sound foundations.”

    No, I base my opinions on DIFFERENT foundations. I do not follow the teachings of Rambam and the limitations he puts on the Noahide Law. I have other rabbis whose opinions I follow. Since the vast majority of rabbis who are involved with the Noahide movement today follow Rambam’s teachings, I am naturally opposed to them.

  7. Elisheva Barre says:

    If “a non-Jew is NOT to worship any other god BUT Hashem”, it means he has to worship ONLY Hashem, based on the principle מכלל לאו את שומע הן This is linguistic but you are a hardened atheist who uses Hashem’s Holy Torah for your own unholy purposes.
    you don’t understand Chullin 33 but since you are not allowed to learn Torah (because whatever it says you are going to distort it), I will not tell you what it means.
    The quote from my and the Rebbe did not say Noahides have to make their own laws. They have to LEARN, and learning means finding a teacher who DOES know. It does not mean distorting and inventing new laws. The Karaites have already done that for refusing to learn.
    Someone who like you does NOT understand the Noahide Law cannot pass judgement on rabbis who teach it.
    Noahide laws are also about the permitted: The consumption of blood is permitted to Noahides.
    Jews have NEVER taken over any other country, and never claimed sovereignty in other land but their own.
    Rabbis don’t have knowledge or understanding – BUT YOU DO!
    I suggest you just give a call to Messiah and tell hm when to come.
    Do call yourself “purple monkey dishwashers”, that’s a cute name. And let Noahides BE Noahides.
    Don’t interfere with our internal disputes! If you care about the Noahide movement and wish to be PART OF IT, put your act straight.
    Noahide law IS Jewish Law, as applied to Noahides.
    Noahide law IS Jewish Law, as applied to Noahides.
    Noahide law IS Jewish Law, as applied to Noahides.
    Noahide law IS Jewish Law, as applied to Noahides.
    Ad infinitum.
    Nachmanides expresses his own opinion in a commentary to Bereshit, he does not express Law. Any student of Jewish sources knows the difference between commentary and Law.
    Since Moses gave the Torah to Israel, Rabbis have always studied and known the Noahide Laws. They just did not make them public because they had other fish to fry. That is why YOU (wrongly) think they did not study them. The proof is all the uncountable times a discussion of these laws appear in the Talmud and rabbinic litterature.
    Of course you are not a fan of the Maimonides, you cannot be! He talks the Law as Moses gave it, and you don’t like that Law which would oblige you to change your darling views.
    In the Law of Rambam quoted by Konvitz quoted by Kook, the wise men of the world do NOT have a share in the World to Come.
    The other rabbis whose opinions you follow are precisely among those whom you criticize for mis-teaching the Noahide Code!
    You are not on the right path, but you may pursue it obstinately. Many others have fallen in the muddy ditch before, and don’t even want to get out of it. If you do not want to understand, you never will.
    Shalom!

    • “If “a non-Jew is NOT to worship any other god BUT Hashem”, it means he has to worship ONLY Hashem”

      Yes, I believe I have made that clear.

      “but you are a hardened atheist who uses Hashem’s Holy Torah for your own unholy purposes.”

      Why on earth do you assume I’m atheist? Good heavens. I can assure you I’m not.

      “you don’t understand Chullin 33 but since you are not allowed to learn Torah (because whatever it says you are going to distort it), I will not tell you what it means.”

      I have read the opinions of other rabbis who interpret Chullin 33 and it is their opinions I follow. They clearly state that Noahide Law is neither as exact nor severe as Jewish Law. As far as my not being able to learn Torah, well…

      “The quote from my and the Rebbe”

      I am not a fan of Messianic Judaism.
      https://academyofshem.wordpress.com/2016/02/25/invasion-of-the-chabady-snatchers/
      Messianic Judaism (i.e., Chabad) has become a major problem with Noahides, telling Noahides that they are not supposed to study the Torah, that Noahides have “inferior animal souls,” etc. I do not follow Chabad teachings any more than I follow Christian teachings. Frankly, there are too many similarities between the two to suit me.

      “They [Noahides] have to LEARN, and learning means finding a teacher who DOES know.”

      Being Chabad automatically disqualifies a Jew from teaching Noahides. Noahide Law is not about Messianic Judaism.

      “It does not mean distorting and inventing new laws.”

      I have never advocated inventing new laws, adding or subtracting from the Torah. As far as distortion goes, I’ll leave that to the Chabad rabbis.

      “The Karaites have already done that for refusing to learn.”

      The Karaites reject the Oral Law. Since the Noahide Law is found only in the Talmud, Noahides are fundamentally opposed to Karaite interpretations.

      “Someone who like you does NOT understand the Noahide Law cannot pass judgement on rabbis who teach it.”

      I understand Noahide Law quite well, and I certainly will pass judgment on a rabbi who is not teaching Noahide Law correctly.

      “Noahide laws are also about the permitted: The consumption of blood is permitted to Noahides.”

      I’ll stick with the rabbinic dictum that just because something is not prohibited doesn’t mean one should do it.

      “Jews have NEVER taken over any other country, and never claimed sovereignty in other land but their own.”

      I agree with this non-sequitur.

      “Rabbis don’t have knowledge or understanding – BUT YOU DO!”

      As far as the Noahide Law is concerned, the rabbis may have great knowledge, but their understanding is lacking simply because they’re Jewish and not Noahide. I’m not going to rely on a rabbi’s understanding of Noahide Law any more than I would on his opinion of the tastiest way to cook shrimp.

      “I suggest you just give a call to Messiah and tell hm when to come.”

      If you’re referring to R’ Schneerson, don’t bother. He’s not haMoshiach.

      “Do call yourself “purple monkey dishwashers”, that’s a cute name. And let Noahides BE Noahides.”

      I would say the exact same to Chabad.

      “Don’t interfere with our internal disputes! If you care about the Noahide movement and wish to be PART OF IT, put your act straight.”

      I do care about the Noahide Movement, and since the Chabad are interfering with the Noahides, their “internal disputes” have become my disputes.
      https://academyofshem.wordpress.com/2016/03/23/schneersonanity/

      “Noahide law IS Jewish Law, as applied to Noahides.
      Noahide law IS Jewish Law, as applied to Noahides.
      Noahide law IS Jewish Law, as applied to Noahides.
      Noahide law IS Jewish Law, as applied to Noahides.
      Ad infinitum.”

      Noahide Law is NOT Jewish Law.
      Noahide Law is NOT Jewish Law.
      Noahide Law is NOT Jewish Law.
      Noahide Law is NOT Jewish Law.
      Ad nauseam.

      “Nachmanides expresses his own opinion in a commentary to Bereshit, he does not express Law. Any student of Jewish sources knows the difference between commentary and Law.”

      In chapters 8–10 of Hilchot Melachim, Rambam also expresses his opinion (as in his statements such as, “it seems to me that Noahides blah blah blah…”) The Noahide teachings of Rambam are opinions.

      “Since Moses gave the Torah to Israel, Rabbis have always studied and known the Noahide Laws. They just did not make them public because they had other fish to fry.”

      Yes, the rabbis were quite busy trying to preserve Israel and the Torah in a hostile world. I have written about this.

      “That is why YOU (wrongly) think they did not study them. The proof is all the uncountable times a discussion of these laws appear in the Talmud and rabbinic litterature.”

      The rabbis did not study the Noahide Laws in depth, mainly because, until the past 30 years or so, there was no need to.

      “Of course you are not a fan of the Maimonides, you cannot be! He talks the Law as Moses gave it, and you don’t like that Law which would oblige you to change your darling views.”

      I’m a fan of Rambam EXCEPT for his teaching on Noahide Law. My “darling view” is that the Noahide Law is a whole lot more than simply a vehicle for individual salvation as Rambam presents it.

      “In the Law of Rambam quoted by Konvitz quoted by Kook, the wise men of the world do NOT have a share in the World to Come.”

      According to the Talmud (Sanhedrin), there are four non-Jews who do not merit life in Olam haBah: Bileam, Doeg, Achitopel, and Gechazi. Rabbinic commentators point out that, since the Talmud took specific paints to point out the four evil commoners who do NOT merit life in the World to Come, then it is apparent that non-Jews DO have a place in the World to Come. But keeping the Noahide Law just to have a place in the World to Come (as Rambam teaches) should not be the goal. Noahides should not keep the Code for the sake of receiving a reward (Avot 1:3).

      “The other rabbis whose opinions you follow are precisely among those whom you criticize for mis-teaching the Noahide Code!”

      Um, no.

      “You are not on the right path, but you may pursue it obstinately.”

      If you mean I’m not blindly following Chabad, you’re right.

      Selah.

  8. Elisheva Barre says:

    Chullin 33 part “…they clearly state that Noahide Law is neither as exact nor severe as Jewish Law”. In THAT particular case they are discussing there and as BEFITTING to that case. It cannot be generalized and no conclusion for other cases can be drawn from it. A capital punishment is pretty severe where a Jew will only have to give compensation. If by “exactness” you mean it is an incomplete law, that is true because many details have been left undetermined. There is a reason for that – but that is another aspect of the Bnei Noah legislation.

    If you are not atheist, please excuse me for having so severly misunderstood your words…

    A lot of shaff got mixed up with the grain in this exchange. If we want it to be a productive discussion, and I think it could and should be, I suggest we take one point at a time. Those who do not teach BN properly are irrelevant. Let’s talk about issues.

    When I said “call Meshiah to come” I meant Meshiach, and NOT the Rebbe!!!
    (It was a bitter private joke, because your impatience contrasted so much with the patience of the Jews… if we would not have been patient, we would not have survived).
    Christianity highjacked Meshiach, the Torah does NOT talk of “salvation” but of “redemption” and that is a totally different concept.

    In any case, I suggest
    1) We agree on definitions of the words we use, such as for instance “Jewish Law” to make Noahide law Jewish or not. There are a number of such words to define.
    2) We leave out personal judgements on rabbis, as well as on one another (!!!).
    3) We circumscribe the topic we wish to discuss, one at a time.
    That is almost a course program, but it could also become a cause program…

    I am taking off until after the high holidays. I am looking forward to continue this conversation after that time, please God, if you wish to as well.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s