Where Do the 'Seven Noahide Laws' Come From Anyway?

There is a strange movement afoot that is trapping the gullible into a false worship. It seems that there are increasing numbers of 'seekers' and disillusioned Protestants that are getting sucked into this pseudo-religious cult.

These overtly 'Jewish' organizations encourage all non-Jews to adhere to the so-called 'Seven Noahide Laws'... Here is just one of many such organizations:

Noahide Nations



Some people may think that one can be a Christian - while at the same time being a Noahide... but they are mistaken. Digging around a bit on the above site, I found the following:

Noahide Nations Lobbies Federal Govt. for Noahides

This notice will provide information and a response regarding an issue that has been brought to the attention of Noahide Nations by way of a public platform. Noahide Nations and others have been falsely accused, publicly, as being “Xtian Orgs Posing as Noahides”.  These false accusations were started by Frances Marakova of Rachav's B'nai Noah web site and Yahoo Group along with Pam Rogers and Nancy January of the Oklahoma B'nai Noach Society.  They were in complete violation of Torah for not contacting me first if they had a complaint and instead went public with their false allegations.  I have provided a great deal of information to many Rabbis in Israel and in the United States that clearly demonstrates the falsehood of their allegations.  Now I wish to share some of this information with you.

(...)

Form 1023 is the IRS application submitted by organizations requesting tax exempt recognition from the IRS.  For reasons unknown to us as of this date the IRS internally designated Noahide Nations and other Noahide organizations with an “X20-Christian” code.  They did so without our knowledge or consent.

Certainly anyone who does a cursory examination of the Noahide Nations web site will see that we are no more Christian than a Jewish organization would be Christian. 

We were made aware of this through a flurry of phone calls and emails from distraught Noahide Nations Members who had been deceived into believing that Noahide Nations was really a Christian organization posing as Noahides.  I wish to thank these fine people who acted as true Noahides by contacting us directly and as a result of their concerns we became aware of the issue and can now do something about it."

Above from HERE

I think that makes it pretty clear that a Noahide is not (and in fact cannot be) a Christian. Noahides are permitted to think of Jesus as a wise Man, as a teacher; a philosopher... but they may not affirm His Divinity. To declare that Jesus is Divine is against the Noahide 'commandment' prohibiting idolatry.

To worship Jesus as the Christ is considered idolatry (and is technically punishable by decapitation according to 'Jewish' [read: Talmudic] law).

So where do these so called 'Seven Noahide Laws' come from anyway? The Noahides will tell you that they come from the Torah. But does that mean that they can be found in our Christian Bibles? The 'Torah' is just the Old Testament, most Westerners will tell us... but is that true?

In actuality, what the Judaics refer to as 'Torah' (teaching) refers to 'The Law' in its entirety... meaning that for 'Jews' (excepting the Karaites of which there are only about 50,000 worldwide) - Torah includes both Written Torah (known as the Tanakh; what Christians refer to as the Old Testament) and Oral Torah (known collectively as Talmud). The following demonstrates the true Talmudic origins of the so-called 'Seven Noahide Laws'.

~~~ ~ † ~ ~~~

(Pharisaism's) "One Indigenous Science"

"… exegesis in the largest sense of the word is in a way
the one indigenous science
which (Pharisaism) has created and developed."

— Jewish Encyclopedia

Exegesis is the process of studying a piece of text and from it deriving meaning that is not immediately apparent. The roots of the word are Greek: ex, out of + hegeisthai, lead. Exegesis is not unlike extrapolation, whereby unknown information is inferred by extending or projecting known information.

Talmud exegesis has a distinctive quality; unless we understand it, the Talmud is baffling. Because the Talmud is finding its way into American law, so also will come Talmud exegetical methods. Good citizenship will require Americans to understand the process.

In Order of Appearance …

When studying the Talmud, we notice the (so-called) 'Sages' refer to Scripture ("Written Law"). We might suppose that, in the history of Judaism (since the return from exile in Babylon), the 'Sages' first studied the Scriptures, and then extrapolated additional laws. According to Jewish 'experts', the actual history is somewhat different. The Jewish people had long been living by traditional "Oral Law" or "the traditions of the elders" about which Jesus of Nazareth spoke:

1. Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying,


2. Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.


3. But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?


4. Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?


5. But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.


6. Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

— Matthew 15:1-3, 12-14

At some point, the [Pharisaic] leadership decided it was important to [make an attempt to] show that "the traditions of the elders" (Oral Law) had a basis in Scripture (Written Law). Rabbi Akiba, who lived between 50 and 135 A.D., is recognized [by his own] as particularly adept at this task. He researched Scripture and assigned ex post facto Scriptural support for "almost every provision of Oral Law." In this passage, Rabbi Michael L. Rodkinson tells us about Rabbi Akiba's efforts.

Through his keen intellect, his vast learning and his energetic activity he wielded a great influence in developing and diffusing the traditional law. He arranged the accumulated material of that law in a proper system and methodical order, and enriched its substance with many valuable deductions of his own … Besides, he introduced a new method of interpreting the Scriptures, which enabled him to find a biblical basis for almost every provision of the oral law. This ingenious method was admired by his contemporaries, and notwithstanding the opposition of some of his colleagues, generally adopted in addition to the hermeneutic rules of R. Ishmael.

— Rabbi Rodkinson,  (Emphasis added)

The 'Very Reverend' the Chief Rabbi of the British Empire, the late Dr. J.H. Hertz, also praised Akiba for his exegetic achievements.

In the following generation, Akiba was the author of a collection of traditional laws out of which the Mishnah actually grew. He was the greatest among the rabbis of his own and of succeeding times, the man of whom — as the legend says — even Moses was for a moment jealous when in a vision he was given a glimpse of the distant future. His keen and penetrating intellect enabled him to find a Biblical basis for every provision of Oral Law.

— Rabbi Dr. Hertz  (Emphasis added)

Not all Talmud students however have a high opinion of Talmudic exegesis.

A reach here, and a grab there, and the Pharisee "Sages" make their own Satanic meaning out of unrelated scriptural verses, plays on words, and other childish devices.

— Elizabeth Dilling (Author: 'The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today')

Non-Discrete Use of Language

What is the process to which Dilling refers? The Talmud 'Sages' formulated a number of exegetical methods. We will consider one of the more frequently encountered forms, which we might call "associative inference." Associative inference depends on a non-discrete use of language. From the viewpoint of Western thought, this is a non-rational use of language, and it deserves a thoughtful consideration. Let us take a hypothetical example, using a simple sentence, "Henry sees a cat," as though it were a Scriptural statement.

In this form of exegesis, we examine our scripture and find another verse that states, "The cat is sitting on the chair." From this second sentence, we perform the unusual process of permanently associating "cat" with "sitting" and "chair." With this association now in force, we look back at the first sentence, and find new meaning. We now discover that the first verse ("Henry sees a cat") is also a statement about chairs and sitting.

Now let us see this method at work in the Talmud.

Exegesis at Work

At some time in their history, the [Pharisees] began making separate laws for the Gentiles that lived among them. Those laws were codified and associated with the Scriptural story of Noah, and came to be known as the "Noahide Laws." Formulation of the Noahide Laws is varied in the Talmud, but the following appears to be the final form:

GEMARA. … Our Rabbis taught: seven precepts were … commanded: social laws; (5) to refrain from blasphemy, idolatry; adultery; bloodshed; robbery; and eating flesh cut from a living animal. (1)

— Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 56a
Soncino 1961 Edition, pages 381-382

The translator, Rabbi Dr. H. Freedman, amplifies the text with footnotes:

5. I.e., to establish courts of justice, or, perhaps, to observe social justice (Nahmanides on Gen. XXXIV, 13): Hast. Dict. (s.v. Noachian precepts) translates 'obedience to authority'.


6. These commandments may be regarded as the foundations of all human and moral progress. Judaism has both a national and a universal outlook in life. In the former sense it is particularistic, setting up a people distinct and separate from others by its peculiar religious law. But in the latter, it recognises that moral progress and its concomitant Divine love and approval are the privilege and obligation of all mankind. And hence the Talmud lays down the seven Noachian precepts, by the observance of which all mankind may attain spiritual perfection, and without which moral death must inevitably ensue. That perhaps is the idea underlying the assertion (passim) that a heathen is liable to death for the neglect of any of these. The last mentioned is particularly instructive as showing the great importance attached to the humane treatment of animals; so much so, that it is declared to be fundamental to human righteousness.

— Rabbi Dr. Freedman

Let us enumerate the seven Noahide Laws that the Jews feel are binding on all Gentiles:

1. social laws


2. to refrain from blasphemy


3. [to refrain from] idolatry


4. [to refrain from] adultery


5. [to refrain from] bloodshed


6. [to refrain from] robbery


7. [to refrain from] eating flesh cut from a living animal

In a subsequent passage, Sanhedrin 56b, R. Johanan seeks to prove by exegesis that the Noahide Laws were given to Man at the time of Creation. The technique of exegesis in this case is primarily the process illustrated above in our "cat" example, that is, identifying verses with parallel wording. Let us see R. Johanan's full statement first.

GEMARA. … R. Johanan answered: The Writ saith: And the Lord God commanded the man saying, of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat. And [He] commanded, refers to [the observance of] social laws, and thus it is written, For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment. The Lord — is [a prohibition against] blasphemy, and thus it is written, and he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death. God — is [an injunction against] idolatry, and thus it is written, Thou shalt have no other gods before Me. The man — refers to bloodshed [murder], and thus it is written, Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed. Saying — refers to adultery, and thus it is written, They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and became another man's. Of every tree of the garden — but not of robbery. Thou mayest freely eat — but not flesh cut from a living animal.

— Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 56b
Soncino 1961 Edition, page 382-383

Now let us study each step of the process in turn to see how a Biblical basis is found for the Oral Law concerning the Gentiles, i.e., the Noahide Laws.

Step by Step Exegesis

Step 1 of Exegesis: The Sage R. Johanan tells us the verse he is using for his exegesis:

GEMARA. … The Writ saith: And the Lord God commanded the man saying, of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat. (4)

— Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 56b
Soncino 1961 Edition, page 382

The translator, Rabbi Dr. Freedman, identifies the verse in a footnote as Genesis 2:16.

4. Gen. II, 16.

— Rabbi Dr. Freedman

We note that the rendition of Genesis 2:16 in the Talmud closely resembles the King James Version of the same verse.

16. And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

— Genesis 2:16 (KJV)

Step 2 of Exegesis: R. Johanan finds a second Biblical verse that contains two elements: the word "command" and a mention of "justice."

GEMARA. … And [He] commanded, refers to [the observance of] social laws, and thus it is written, For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment. (1)

— Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 56b
Soncino 1961 Edition, pages 382-383

The translator, Rabbi Dr. Freedman, identifies the second verse in a footnote as Genesis 18:19.

1. Gen. XVIII, 19. Thus 'command' relates to justice and judgment.

— Rabbi Dr. Freedman

Now we can see R. Johanan in his exegetical process. He couples the word "command" in Genesis 2:16 with the word "command" in Genesis 18:19. Since Genesis 18:19 also contains the words "justice and judgment," R. Johanan concludes that the mention of "command" in the Genesis 2:16 also carries the implication of "justice and judgment." ("And [He] commanded, refers to [the observance of] social laws …" says R. Johanan.)

Step 3 of Exegesis: Now, R. Johanan continues his exegesis. Taking the words, "the Lord" from his original verse, Genesis 2:16 (above), he finds another verse, this one containing the words "the Lord" and "blasphemy":

GEMARA. … The Lord — is [a prohibition against] blasphemy, and thus it is written, and he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death. (2)

— Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 56b
Soncino 1961 Edition, page 383

The translator, Rabbi Dr. Freedman, identifies this third verse in a footnote as Leviticus 24:16.

2. Lev. XXIV, 16 — 'The Lord' being used in connection with blasphemy.

— Rabbi Dr. Freedman

Again, because Leviticus 24:16 contains both the word "Lord" and the word "blasphemy," R. Johanan concludes that Genesis 2:16 contains a prohibition against "blasphemy."

Step 4 of Exegesis: R. Johanan's exegesis continues with the word "God." He selects a fourth verse that contains both "God" and the concept of idolatry:

GEMARA. … God — is [an injunction against] idolatry, and thus it is written, Thou shalt have no other gods before Me. (3)

— Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 56b
Soncino 1961 Edition, page 383

The translator, Rabbi Dr. Freedman, identifies this fourth verse in a footnote as Exodus 20:3.

3. Ex. XX, 3.

— Rabbi Dr. Freedman

By this exegesis, R. Johanan asserts that Genesis 2:16 contains the commandment to refrain from idolatry.

Step 5 of Exegesis: R. Johanan continues with the words "the man" and a fifth verse.

GEMARA. … The man — refers to bloodshed [murder], and thus it is written, Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed. (4)

— Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 56b
Soncino 1961 Edition, page 383

The translator, Rabbi Dr. Freedman, identifies this fifth verse in a footnote as Genesis 9:6.

4. Gen. IX, 6.

— Rabbi Dr. Freedman

By this exegesis, R. Johanan asserts that Genesis 2:16 contains the commandment to refrain from murder.

Step 6 of Exegesis: Now, R. Johanan continues. He finds a verse that contains both "saying" and adultery.

GEMARA. … Saying — refers to adultery, and thus it is written, They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and became another man's. (5)

— Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 56b
Soncino 1961 Edition, page 383

The translator, Rabbi Dr. Freedman, identifies this sixth verse in a footnote as Jeremiah 3:1.

5. Jer. III, 1. Thus 'saying' is used in connection with adultery.

— Rabbi Dr. Freedman

Because the two words, "say" and "adultery" appear together in the Jeremiah verse, R. Johanan infers that the word "saying" in the Genesis verse implies adultery. The Bible Timeline estimates that Jeremiah was written 600 years after the books of Moses (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy). Recall that R. Johanan is performing exegesis on Genesis 2:16.

Step 7 of Exegesis: R. Johanan's exegesis continues with the words "of every tree of the garden" and an inherent inference.

GEMARA. … Of every tree of the garden — but not of robbery. (6)

— Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 56b
Soncino 1961 Edition, page 383

The translator, Rabbi Dr. Freedman, amplifies the text with a footnote:

6. Since it was necessary to authorize Adam to eat of the trees of the garden, it follows that without such authorisation — i.e., when something belongs to another — it is forbidden.

— Rabbi Dr. Freedman

Thus, according to R. Johanan, Genesis 2:16 contains the prohibition against robbery.

Step 8 of Exegesis: R. Johanan's exegesis concludes with the words "thou mayest freely eat" and another inherent inference.

GEMARA. … Thou mayest freely eat — but not flesh cut from a living animal. (7)

— Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 56b
Soncino 1961 Edition, page 383

How does R. Johanan get from "thou mayest freely eat" to a prohibition against eating the "flesh cut from a living animal"? The translator, Rabbi Dr. Freedman, explains in a footnote, and goes on to comment on the exegesis of the whole verse.

7. By interpreting thus: Thou mayest eat that which is now ready for eating, but not whilst the animal is alive. It is perhaps remarkable that a verse, the literal meaning of which is obviously permission to enjoy, should be interpreted as a series of prohibitions. Yet it is quite in keeping with the character of the Talmud: freedom to enjoy must be limited by moral and social considerations, and indeed only attains its highest value when so limited. Cf. Ab. VI, 2: No man is free but he who labours in the Torah.

— Rabbi Dr. Freedman

Thus, Rabbi Dr. Freedman concurs with R. Johanan: Genesis 2:16 contains the prohibition against eating a limb cut from a living animal, and the other six Noahide Laws as well. To recap, Genesis 2:16 (And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat) is shown to contain all of the Seven Noahide Laws:

1. And [He] commanded — [to establish] social laws


2. The Lord — [to refrain from] blasphemy


3. God — [to refrain from] idolatry


4. The man — [to refrain from] bloodshed


5. Saying — [to refrain from] adultery


6. Of every tree of the garden — [to refrain from] robbery


7. Thou mayest freely eat — [to refrain from] eating flesh cut from a living animal

And because they were given to Adam at Creation, the seven Noahide Laws are [according to the modern-day Pharisees] binding upon all men. The Noahide laws are exegetically associated with other Biblical bases. Search for "Noah" and "Noachide" with the Come and Hear™ Search Engine.

There are many other examples of [rabbinical] exegesis in the Talmud, and examples can be found in almost every folio. As well, there are other kinds of exegesis. Tractate Sanhedrin is one of the more interesting tractates for the beginning reader, and is rich with [ridiculous] exegesis.

Exegesis — [Pharisaism's] "One Indigenous Science"

Let us revisit the Jewish Encyclopedia:

Israel has been called "the People of the Book"; it may as fitly be called "the people of Scripture exegesis," for exegesis in the largest sense of the word is in a way the one indigenous science which Israel has created and developed, after having produced, during the first long period of its history, the actual subject of this science, the Bible itself.

— Jewish Encyclopedia (Emphasis added)

[Note from me: The above is a baldfaced lie.

What the Jewish Encyclopedia describes as Israel being "the people of Scripture exegesis" is actually the Pharisees turning Scripture upside-down and inside-out.

Israel (the Church) 'produced' the Bible... The Pharisees were the ones that "created and developed" the Rabbinical interpretations which Jesus Christ said had made the Commandments of God of no effect - now known as Talmud.

Israel = The Church = The Bible

'Jewish' = The Pharisees = The Talmud]

The Jewish Encyclopedia continues with naming the great developers of the science of exegesis:

The period between the destruction of Jerusalem and the Hadrianic war was the most fruitful and important epoch for early exegesis, and its representatives were Johanan b. Zakkai's pupils and their disciples. Chief among these in the field of halakic exegesis are Ishmael b. Elisha and Akiba ben Joseph …

— Jewish Encyclopedia

The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia continues the history, describing some of the achievements:

Ishmael expanded Hillel's seven rules into thirteen … Akiba, on the other hand, took the view that every word of the Scriptures, even apparently insignificant particles, had a significance for the derivation of the Halachah. Akiba's work was continued by his pupils, one of whom, Eliezer, formulated thirty-two rules for Halachic interpretation.

— Universal Jewish Encyclopedia

And the Jewish Encyclopedia expands on a description of Akiba's achievements.

Akiba, imbued with the incomparable importance of the Biblical text, successfully defended the opinion he derived from his teacher, Nahum of Gimzo, that not even what might seem to be the most insignificant word of the text was without its especial meaning; hence everything contained in the text must become the subject of interpretation.

— Jewish Encyclopedia

The history continues, of course, down through the ages, for the development and purification of Jewish law, philosophy, and mysticism did not cease.

Numerology and Ciphers

There are other exegesis techniques, aside from those we have examined above. Professor E.M. Butler, in his book, Ritual Magic, describes some techniques based on numerology and ciphers. See the Appendix: Practical Kabbalah, "A Veritable Storehouse for Magicians …"

Exegesis in American Law

We have seen weaker forms of exegesis in American law since its founding, of course. Let us hark to the words of Rabbi Dr. J.H. Hertz as he writes of the Torah-Talmud:

… but the revelation, the real Torah, was the meaning of that Written Text, the Divine thought therein disclosed, as unfolded in ever greater richness of detail by successive generations of devoted teachers …

— Rabbi Dr. Hertz

Given any Article in the Bill of Rights, the plain language reading does not necessarily govern in the present-day American legal system. The United States Constitution has "evolved" through successive interpretations (exegeses) by judges; in this case, rather than the Torah, the judges are unfolding the "living Constitution."

Now comes the Institute of Judaic Law to America to introduce Talmudic law more directly into the courts and law schools. With the welcome the Institute has received from the Supreme Court, we can look forward to further metamorphosis of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The direct introduction of Talmud law will be one kind of change (see Sentence and Execution). But the increased use of Talmudic exegesis in American jurisprudence will undoubtedly work more profound changes than any we have seen to date. Without doubt, we live in interesting times.

Thank you for your consideration of the above,
Carol A. Valentine,

Come and Hear!

~~~ ~ † ~ ~~~

Now you would think the fact that the 'Noahide Laws' are not at all found in Scripture... and had to be concocted using the above dishonest intellectual gymnastics would keep people from joining a Noahide organization... but sadly that is not the case.

It seems clear to me that the Pharisees began with the seven laws fully formulated and worked their way backwards, using complicated sophistry and conscious deception to attempt to justify them using the Scriptures. It also seems clear to me that the grade that the Pharisees receive for their 'work' is.... fail.

Here's a good example of the type of deluded people (the majority of whom are from formerly Christian background) that join these Noahide orgsanizations...

To Pork or Not to Pork

Observant Noahides don't eat pork for different reasons:

1. Pigs are sensitive. They squeal from pain and fright as a human being might.

2. Pigs have unclean habits. Their dung is remarkably foul and copiously excreted.

3. Pigs eat dung, vermin, and carrion.

4. Pigs do not work--they cannot be ridden--they do not produce milk or eggs for human use.

5. Pigs' flesh resemble human flesh in its texture and aroma. Burnt human flesh smells like burning bacon.

6. To eat the flesh of pigs, the Torah teaches, is an abominable thing.

Sad no? There's more to be found... all nonsense...

The Holiday Season

As a Noahide, I gave up celebrating Christmas even though it seems like it's more about the jolly big man with a white beard than the birth of Jesus.

When I converted to the Noahide belief system, I decided to observe all 7 laws of Noah. Since Noahide parallels Judaism in a sense, I knew that I had to give up celebrating Christmas. It bothered other people than it bothered me. Actually, not spending my hard-earned dollars wasn't going to be a problem, but that's not the reason I gave Christmas up.

Christmas is the time of year when all Christians celebrate the coming of the Savior. We all know that no one knows the exact date of Jesus' birth or even what month it fell on, but Christians around the world know one thing--25 Dec is the day they celebrate the birth of Christ.

It really irks me to learn that some Muslims, Jews, atheists, and other non-christain belief systems celebrate the birth of the one person they don't believe in! They reason that they do it for their kids. Well, what about teaching their kids about the Koran or the Torah. These Holy Writings DO NOT include Jesus.

I don't celebrate Hanukkah either because I want to understand it fully before I even attempt to light the first candle, if I'm entitled to even light the first candle. So, the holidays are just another set of days for me. I do enjoy this time of year. I love the lights and the festive mood everyone is in. Too bad, people can't continue their cheerful disposition throughout the year. And if my family invites me over for Christmas dinner, I will be more than happy to attend. After all, it is still my family.

Be safe everyone and drink responsibly.

Shalom!
Sally

Above is from HERE

Lord have mercy!

~~~ ~ † ~ ~~~

†IC XC†

†NI KA†