Let’s be blunt. This blog post is a complete denunciation of the Noahide laws – these are anathema to the followers of the truth in MASHIACH – who is the way, the truth, and the life. Here we are going to see that the Noahide laws presented to the world by Hasidic and Orthodox Judaism are first FALSE in their conception and their history, and second, and not any form of morality whatsoever, as we will soon see.
Yahuchanon (John) 14:6
YAHUSHA said unto him, I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life: no man comes unto the Father, but by me.
Let’s begin by the admission as to what are the Noahide laws in the modern world. According to Jews and Hasidic Gentiles United to Save America (JAHG-USA), the following is true:
“To the Jewish people [sic] G-d gave the entire Torah [teaching] as their Law. They therefore have a special responsibility—with special commandments—to be the priesthood of the world [sic], a "light unto the nations."
“What about the rest of the world? What is G-d's will for them?
“G-d gave Noah and all his descendants (B'nei Noach or "children of Noah") seven commandments to obey [sic]. These seven universal laws (known as the "Seven Noahide Laws") were reaffirmed with Moses and the Jewish people at Mt. Sinai in what is now known as the Oral Torah [i.e., not written down so the rest of the world could verify this claim], establishing modern observance [source?] of these laws. These seven commandments (mitsvoth), actually seven categories of hundreds of specific laws, are G-d's will for all non-Jews [source?].
“Non-Jews who (1) reject all idolatrous ideas [in whose opinion?] and accept the kingship of the One G-d, (2) accept the priesthood of the Jewish people as the guardians and teachers of Torah [source?], and (3) commit to following the Seven Noahide Laws as revealed in the Oral Torah [source?] from Mt. Sinai are "Hasidic Gentiles" or "Noahides." The term "Hasidic Gentile" is derived from a classic commentary by the Rambam, Rav Moshe ben Maimon (Maimonides), in The Laws of Kings 8:11:
"Anyone who accepts upon himself the fulfillment of these Seven Mitzvos [commandments] and is precise in their observance is considered one of the hasidei umos ha'olam ["Hasidim of the nations of the world"] and will merit a share in the World to Come."
“The Seven Noahide Laws are the minimal observance for non-Jews. The source of these laws and the basis of their understanding is the Oral Torah, which G-d gave to the Jewish people at Mount Sinai [sic] along with His Written Law. By learning from the Jews and performing the mitsvoth, non-Jews have a crucial role in G-d's Creation.
“The Seven Noahide Laws actually encompass numerous details and applications within hundreds of laws, each with specific applications. One should also keep in mind that these laws are only the minimal basis for a Hasidic gentile's service to G-d, since there are many Jewish mitzvos that non-Jews are encouraged to adopt to accomplish more. Through these laws a gentile refines himself and the Creation as a whole, fulfilling his purpose for existence.”
[Note: Their website features a photo of the now-deceased Messiah Rabbi Schneerson]
The Noahide Laws are based on the codification of “Oral Law” as set forth in the Babylonian Talmud. Because there is no written record prior to the creation of the Yerushalmi Mishneh, we have only the opinion of these writers and their biases to substantiate the claim that the ordinances set forth therein were actual “oral tradition” or well-understood, and well-accepted “oral law” and that the written codification was free of all corruption, some 1500 years (15 centuries) after they were supposedly given.
Important to recognize: the first written Mishneh was finalized by Judah the Prince around the year 200 CE, well after the rise of the following of YAHUSHA had burst on the scene. It was “polished” in Babylon under Babylonian influence some 200-500 years later, and subsequently reaffirmed by the Zohar influenced Sephardim in Spain during the time of Maimonides (1135-1204) (mentioned above), who gave definition to the “Noahide” laws some 2500 years after they were supposedly given at Mt. Sinai.
Before we review the “Noahide” laws, let take a quick look at the lies in the claims of JAGH-USA, shall we?
- “To the Jewish people [sic] G-d gave the entire Torah [teaching] as their Law.”
Shemoth (Exodus) 19:3-5
And Mosheh went up unto ELOHIYM, and YAHUAH called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shall you say to the house of Ya`aqov, and tell the children of Yashar’el; 4 Ye have seen what I did unto the Mitsriym, and how I bore you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself. 5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and guard את eth-my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: 6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. These are the words which you shall speak unto the children of Yashar’el.
Not to belabor a point, but Yahudah (Judah) was but one of the 13 houses called Yashar’el (Ephrayim and Menashsheh, the sons of Yoceph sitting in place of the house of Yoceph).
The Torah was never given exclusively to the tribe of Yahudah; the Torah was not given to the practitioners of the Talmud in the religion called Judaism, since that religion did not form until the creation of the Yerushalmi Talmud; the Torah was not given to the Pharisees (the Parashiym – the so-called children of Pheres) for the same reason the Torah wasn’t given exclusively to the house of Yahudah; and the Torah was not given to the Yahudiym – i.e., the citizens of the Kingdom of Yahud (the Kingdom of David and his progeny), because they didn’t exist yet and wouldn’t exist for generations.
Furthermore, the Torah was not only intended for just the children of Yashar’el:
Vayiqra (Leviticus) 19:33-34
And if a stranger sojourn with you in your land, ye shall not vex him. 34 But the stranger that dwells with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and you shall love him as yourself; for ye were strangers in the land of Mitsrayim: I am YAHUAH ELOHAYKEM.
Bemidbar (Numbers) 9:14
And if a stranger shall sojourn among you, and will keep the Pecach unto YAHUAH; according to the ordinance of the Pecach, and according to the manner thereof, so shall he do: ye shall have one ordinance, both for the stranger, and for him that was born in the land.
The reduction of the priesthood to just Jews – when no Yahudiy citizenship exists or has existed since 586 BC, and when Judaism did not come to exist before the third century – and the application of the Torah belonging only to the Jews is a reduction of the Torah, prohibited by the Torah itself. So in addition to this being a blatant falsehood and a categoric misrepresentation of what the Torah actually says, it also is anathema to the Torah and directly contradicts it.
- “The Jews therefore have a special responsibility—with special commandments—to be the priesthood of the world [sic], a "light unto the nations."
Absolute baloney. There are no “special commandments” for the house of Yahudah given in the Torah, nor are they called out to be the priesthood to the world. It was always been and continues to be a responsibility of the whole of the house of Yashar’el and those who sojourn with them.
- “G-d gave Noah and all his descendants (B'nei Noach or "children of Noah") seven commandments to obey [sic].
Keeping in mind that this conclusion rests entirely upon the “Oral Law” as defined by a corrupted pharisaical priesthood existing in the third century, made up exclusively of those who already considered and denied the deity of Mashiach, let’s see what the truth is.
Yovheliym (Jubilees) 7:20
And in the twenty eighth jubilee Noach began to enjoin upon his son’s sons the ordinances and commandments, and all the judgments that he knew, and he exhorted his sons to observe righteousness, and to cover the shame of their flesh, and to bless their Creator, and honour father and mother, and love their neighbour, and guard their souls from fornication and uncleanness and all iniquity.
Unlike the rabbinical reach to create out of whole cloth a set of laws based upon centuries of rabbinical midrash, we actually have a list of laws actually given to Noach.
- Observe righteousness,
- Cover the shame of their flesh,
- Bless their Creator,
- Honour father and mother,
- Love their neighbour,
- Guard their souls from fornication and uncleanness
- [Guard their souls from] all iniquity.
But, the rabbis of the third century – many of whom were not of the tribe of Yahudah – couldn’t refer to these laws, because they refused to recognize the Cepher Yovheliym. So, they came up with their own.
The last lie of this claim is as follows:
- “Non-Jews who (1) reject all idolatrous ideas and accept the kingship of the One G-d, (2) accept the priesthood of the Jewish people as the guardians and teachers of Torah, and (3) commit to following the Seven Noahide Laws as revealed in the Oral Torah from Mt. Sinai are "Hasidic Gentiles" or "Noahides."
The first premise is to accept “One G-d” as that concept is understood by the practitioners of Talmudic Judaism, which of course means denying the Son; (Because they still can’t answer the question posed by Shalomah (Solomon) in Mishlei (Proverbs) 30:4).
The second is to accept the priesthood of the Jewish people as the guardians and teacher of Torah. This cannot be credibly done by anyone, nor should it be accepted by anyone.
First, the whole of the house of Yashar’el and those who sojourn with them are declared to be priests under the Torah (ignoring for a moment that the followers of Mashiach are all kings and priests), not just the house of Yahudah.
Second, the practitioners of Talmudic Judaism cannot be trusted with the Torah as there are so many premises within the Talmud are contradictory, nullifying, and anathema to the Torah. It is doubtful, given the modern practice found within the nation of Israel, that they can even be trusted as guardians of the Talmud, let alone the Torah.
Third, there is no scriptural support for the claim that the Seven Noahide Laws were given at Mt. Sinai.
In short, there is nothing viable or credible in the claim of JAHG-USA concerning the Noahide Laws. As to the content of these laws, let’s take a look at what the Talmudists propose:
THE SEVEN “NOAHIDE” LAWS
NOAHIDE 1. Idolatry is forbidden. Man is commanded to believe in the One God alone and worship only Him.
IDOLATRY – To worship YAHUSHA as the Messiah is blasphemy according to the Talmud and punishable by decapitation.
NOAHIDE 2. Incestuous and adulterous relations are forbidden. Human beings are not sexual objects, nor is pleasure the ultimate goal of life.
The following is taken from http://www.talmudblasphemy.com/talmud-children.htm
“Talmud law permits sexual intercourse between children and adults. This doctrine is contained in a number of Mishnahs. Before we examine them, however, it is necessary that the reader be familiar with the word kethubah.
Here is a Mishnah from Kethuboth 11a:
MISHNAH. WHEN A GROWN-UP MAN (7) HAS HAD SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH (8) A LITTLE GIRL, (9) OR WHEN A SMALL BOY (10) HAS INTERCOURSE WITH A GROWN-UP WOMAN, OR [WHEN A GIRL WAS ACCIDENTALLY] INJURED BY A PIECE OF WOOD (11) — [IN ALL THESE CASES] THEIR KETHUBAH IS TWO HUNDRED [ZUZ] …
— Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Kethuboth 11a
Soncino 1961 Edition, page 57
The translator, Rabbi Dr. Samuel Daiches, amplifies the text with footnotes:
A man who was of age.
Lit., 'who came on'.
Less than three years old.
Less than nine years of age.
Lit., 'One who was injured by wood', as a result of which she injured the hymen.
— Rabbi Dr. Daiches
Let's review the above-cited Mishnah: "When a grown-up man has had sexual intercourse with a little girl, or when a small boy has intercourse with a grown-up woman …" It is obvious that sex activity between a grown man and a little girl, and between a grown woman and a little boy, is a part of the woof and the warp of everyday Talmud life; such relationships, in the eyes of the Sages, are unremarkable. There is no prohibition on sexual activity between adults and young children — it is simply regulated. Recall the words of the Very Reverend the Chief Rabbi of the British Empire the late Dr. Joseph Herman Hertz:
Religion in the Talmud attempts to penetrate the whole of human life with the sense of law and right. Nothing human is in its eyes mean or trivial; everything is regulated and sanctified by religion. Religious precept and duty accompany man from his earliest years to the grave and beyond it. They guide his desires and actions at every moment.
— Rabbi Dr. Hertz (38)
Thus, if the Talmud permits girls three years old and younger to be sexually used by adults, that is the law. The concern of the Sages is to ensure that the adult is not, technically speaking, in violation of any of the rules.
In the Gemara that follows the Mishnah of Kethuboth 11a (cited above), the Sages discuss the issues. They say having intercourse with a girl younger than three is like putting a finger in the eye. Rabbi Dr. Daiches explains in the footnotes that, just as tears come to the eye again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years.
GEMARA. Rab Judah said that Rab said: A small boy who has intercourse with a grown-up woman makes her [as though she were] injured by a piece of wood. (1) When I said it before Samuel he said: 'Injured by a piece of wood' does not apply to (2) flesh. Some teach this teaching by itself: (3) [As to] a small boy who has intercourse with a grown-up woman, Rab said, he makes her [as though she were] injured by a piece of wood; whereas Samuel said: 'Injured by a piece of wood' does not apply to flesh. R. Oshaia objected: WHEN A GROWN-UP MAN HAS HAD INTERCOURSE WITH A LITTLE GIRL, OR WHEN A SMALL BOY HAS INTERCOURSE WITH A GROWN-UP WOMAN, OR WHEN A GIRL WAS ACCIDENTALLY INJURED BY A PIECE OF WOOD — [IN ALL THESE CASES] THEIR KETHUBAH IS TWO HUNDRED [ZUZ]; SO ACCORDING TO R. MEIR. BUT THE SAGES SAY: A GIRL WHO WAS INJURED ACCIDENTALLY BY A PIECE OF WOOD — HER KETHUBAH IS A MANEH! (4) Raba said, It means (5) this: When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this, (6) it is as if one puts the finger into the eye; (7) but when a small boy has intercourse with a grown-up woman he makes her as 'a girl who is injured by a piece of wood,' and [with regard to the case of] 'a girl injured by a piece of wood,' itself, there is the difference of opinion between R. Meir and the Sages.
— Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Kethuboth 11b
Soncino 1961 Edition, page 57-58
Rabbi Dr. Samuel Daiches amplifies the text with footnotes (page 58):
Although the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act, nevertheless the woman is injured by it as by a piece of wood.
Lit., 'is not in'.
I.e., the difference of opinion between Rab and Samuel with regard to that question was recorded without any reference to R. Judah.
The Sages differ only with regard to a girl injured by a piece of wood, but not with regard to a small boy who has intercourse with a grown-up woman. This shows that the latter case cannot be compared with the former case. The Mishnah would consequently be against Rab and for Samuel.
Lit., 'here', that is, less than three years old.
I.e., tears come to the eye again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years. Cf. Nid. 45a.
— Rabbi Dr. Daiches
The amount of a woman's kethubah depends on her virginity on her wedding day. But what of a woman who, as a little girl below the age of three years, was raped or otherwise subjected to sexual intercourse? The Sages rule that the kethubah of such a woman is set as if she were still a virgin.
MISHNAH. A WOMAN PROSELYTE, A WOMAN CAPTIVE, AND A WOMAN SLAVE, WHO HAVE BEEN REDEEMED, CONVERTED, OR FREED [WHEN THEY WERE] LESS THAN THREE YEARS AND ONE DAY OLD — THEIR KETHUBAH IS TWO HUNDRED [ZUZ]. AND THERE IS WITH REGARD TO THEM THE CLAIM OF [NON-]VIRGINITY. (17)
— Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Kethuboth 11a
Soncino 1961 Edition, page 54
If they had sexual intercourse before they were three years and one day old the hymen would grow again, and they would be virgins. V. 9a and 11b and cf. Nid. 44b and 45a.
— Rabbi Dr. Daiches (25)
GEMARA. … Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Pederasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that. (2) What is the basis of their dispute? — Rab maintains that only he who is able to engage in sexual intercourse, may, as the passive subject of pederasty throw guilt [upon the active offender]; whilst he who is unable to engage in sexual intercourse cannot be a passive subject of pederasty [in that respect]. (3) But Samuel maintains: Scripture writes, [And thou shalt not lie with mankind] as with the lyings of a woman. (4)
It has been taught in accordance with Rab: Pederasty at the age of nine years and a day; [55a] [he] who commits bestiality, whether naturally or unnaturally; or a woman who causes herself to be bestially abused, whether naturally or unnaturally, is liable to punishment. (5)
— Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 54b - 55a
Soncino 1961 Edition, page 371
The translator, Rabbi Dr. H. Freedman, amplifies the text with footnotes. Note particularly footnote 2: "… but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age, no guilt is incurred." See also the final sentence of footnote 5: "… nine years (and a day) is the minimum age of the passive partner for the adult to be liable." (See Soncino Talmud Glossary for definition of Baraitha.)
I.e., Rab makes nine years the minimum; but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age, no guilt is incurred. Samuel makes three the minimum.
At nine years a male attains sexual matureness.
Lev. XVIII, 22. Thus the point of comparison is the sexual matureness of woman, which is reached at the age of three.
(Rashi reads [H] instead of the [H] in our printed texts. A male, aged nine years and a day who commits etc.] There are thus three distinct clauses in this Baraitha. The first — a male aged nine years and a day — refers to the passive subject of pederasty, the punishment being incurred by the adult offender. This must be its meaning — because firstly, the active offender is never explicitly designated as a male, it being understood, just as the Bible states, Thou shalt not lie with mankind, where only the sex of the passive participant is mentioned; and secondly, if the age reference is to the active party, the guilt being incurred by the passive adult party, why single out pederasty: in all crimes of incest, the passive adult does not incur guilt unless the other party is at least nine years and a day? Hence the Baraitha supports Rab's contention that nine years (and a day) is the minimum age of the passive partner for the adult to be liable.
— Rabbi Dr. Freedman
The plain English meaning of the Talmud text is clear, but if there is any doubt, the Soncino scholars put the matter to rest: No guilt is incurred with a boy child younger than nine, even in incest. Thus we see that Orthodox Jewish doctrines concerning homosexuality are not accurately represented by modern commentators and other Orthodox spokesmen.
Do you still want to accept the “priesthood” of the Jewish people as the guardians and teachers of Torah? Do you want to accept the Sanhedrin as the judicial authority as to sexual morality?
NOAHIDE 3. Murder is forbidden. The life of a human being, formed in God’s image, is sacred.
Well now, who could disagree with this? The answer: those practicing Talmudic Judaism.
Talmudic scholars maintain that the prohibition on "harm" refers to the woman and not to the fetus, since the scriptural injunction, "He that smites a man so that he dies, shall surely be put to death" (Shemoth (Ex.) 21:12), did not apply to the killing of a fetus (Mekh. SbY, ed. Epstein-Melamed, 126; also Mekh. Mishpatim 8; Targ. Yer., Ex. 21:22–23; BK 42a).
NOAHIDE 4. Cursing the name of God is forbidden. Besides honoring and respecting G-d, we learn from this precept that our speech must be sanctified, as that is the distinctive sign which separated man from the animals.
Just speaking the name of YAHUAH is forbidden under the Talmud.
The Mishnah in Sanhedrin 10 (1) lists those who have no share in the World to Come. Included in these according to Abba Shaul is someone who utters the Divine Name as it is spelled.
The Rambam's commentary on the mishnah says, “And [likewise], one who pronounces the name [of God] with its letters, yod, hay vav, hay - which is the explicit name (shem hameforash). And they have already mentioned things besides these, that if one does them, he has no share in the world to come.”
According to Judaism 101, “Nothing in the Torah prohibits a person from pronouncing the Name of God. Indeed, it is evident from scripture that God's Name was pronounced routinely. Many common Hebrew names contain "Yah" or "Yahu," part of God's four-letter Name. The Name was pronounced as part of daily services in the Temple.
[NOTE: Judaism 101 does not make any reference to “Yeh” or “Yeho”].
The Mishnah confirms that there was no prohibition against pronouncing The Name in ancient times. However, by the time of the Talmud, it was the custom to use substitute Names for God. Some rabbis asserted that a person who pronounces YHVH according to its letters (instead of using a substitute) has no place in the World to Come, and should be put to death. Instead of pronouncing the four-letter Name, we usually substitute the Name "Adonai," or simply say "Ha-Shem" (lit. The Name).
Those that we should trust would deny us the right to speak the name (Devariym (Deuteronomy) 32:1; Tehilliym (Psalm) 22:22; Yahuchanon (John) 17:26) and will in fact kill us for doing so.
NOAHIDE 5. Theft is forbidden. The world is not ours to do with as we please.
While this command is consistent with the Ten Devariym actually given to us in writing in both Shemoth 20 and Devariym 5 – but why are the others cut out? Gentiles don’t have to honor their father and mother (even though that law was actually given to Noach); they can obviously bear false witness; and covetousness is permitted through omission.
NOAHIDE 6. Eating the flesh of a living animal is forbidden. This teaches us to be sensitive to cruelty to animals.
This is interesting given that the teaching of the Apostles is to avoid meat sacrificed to idols. The overwhelming Torah mitsvah is to not eat blood of any sort. To somehow pull out this obscure law somehow means that eating blood or unclean food is expressly allowed for the Gentiles. The outrage should be found in the omission.
NOAHIDE 7. Mankind is commanded to establish courts of justice and a just social order to enforce the first six laws and enact any other useful laws or customs.
Guess who wants to be the worldwide Supreme Court? It is none other than the nascent Sanhedrin, now convening in their new headquarters under the Temple Mount in Yerushalayim.
The Noahide laws have no place in the United States, and should be foreclosed by International Law to be inapplicable in all nations with the possible exception of Israel. In addition to being an open contradiction to the Torah, anathema to the New Testament (the Brit Chadasha), and fraudulent in their creation, they also violate the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
In short, they should be rebuked, condemned, and made null and void as a matter of any legal effect whatsoever. Arguments in favor of the Noahide laws can be described as being ”without form, and void; and darkness hangs over the face of the deep.”