Noahide News

Part 755

6-5- 2007 AD of Our LORD Jesus the Christ the Creator

Talmudic Dragon Moon Calendar  Sivan 19 of Talmudic

 Perpetual PURIM Sivan 5767 ,   their Babylonian times of their  Babylonian Sumerian Doctrine and laws 5767

Ps:118:24: This is the day which the LORD hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.

 

 The FINISH 

of Iniquity unto desolation for them who Deny the Christ, Jesus the Lord.

mason seal 

a Fictional Cartoon?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=3yrpvEqiNKo

 

Not even close to hardly, this is real. They think their Evil will bring their good, their Hoodlum haha of Hell unto their wannabe god

What an yiddiot

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Arkansas_GOP_head_We_need_more_0603.html

Arkansas GOP head: We need more 'attacks on American soil' so people appreciate Bush

Josh Catone
Published: Sunday June 3, 2007

 

In his first interview as the chairman of the Arkansas Republican Party, Dennis Milligan told a reporter that America needs to be attacked by terrorists so that people will appreciate the work that President Bush has done to protect the country.

"At the end of the day, I believe fully the president is doing the right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001]," Milligan said to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, "and the naysayers will come around very quickly to appreciate not only the commitment for President Bush, but the sacrifice that has been made by men and women to protect this country."

Milligan, who was elected as the new chair of the Arkansas Republican Party just two weeks ago, also told the newspaper that he is "150 percent" behind Bush in the war in Iraq.

In his acceptance speech on May 19th, Milligan told his fellow Republicans that it was "time for a rediscovery of our values and our common sense."

The owner of a water treatment company, Milligan was a relative unknown in Arkansas politics until being elected the party chairman. He had previously served as the party's treasurer and the Saline County Republican chair

 

 

______

They are not yet ready, for they must first Foment their Wars for their Ordo ab chao

http://www.thesanhedrin.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=620

Binyomin



Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 565
Location: Bnei Brak

PostPosted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 9:35 am    Post subject:

There are two things happening at the same time.
First both websites thesanhedrin.org and thesanhedrin.net are being reorganized, so that is slowing things down. Secondly, this particular peace initiative was prematurely reported by YNet, no other source has talked about it.

All the best
Binyomin

 

_________

the Devil cries out while he enslaves mankind

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3408801,00.html

Holocaust denier establishes party in Japan

 

Richard Koshimizu claims no Jews were murdered during World War II, and that Hitler was funded and protected by Jews. Anti-Semite political activist to deliver public speech at State-funded venue this week

Iris Georlette
Published:  06.05.07, 10:52 / Israel Jewish Scene
 

TOKYO – A Japanese political activist who holds radical anti-Semitic views, Richard Koshimizu, has set up a political party named "Independence Party," and is planning to deliver a public speech in the city of Kyoto this week.

 

Koshimizu operates a website in which he claims that no Jews were murdered during the Holocaust, and that only 60,000 Jews died of diseases
in the war. According to the site, Adolf Hitler was the grandson of Solomon Meyer Rothschild, and the Nazi dictator's rise to power was funded by Rothschild and other Jewish corporations.

 

On the site, Koshimizu writes that Hitler fled to Argentina at the end of the war and after he saw that his objective – the establishment of a Jewish state – had materialized. He lived there until 1980, protected by the Jewish community, the site states.

_________

The Illuminated Self Exalted Masters of Chabad of Sanhedrin

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3avVyf1OMjQ

______

Jesus didnt say "no" to noahide, HE WAS THE AUTHOR OF IT

COULD IT BE SAMLIQUIDATION IS IN FACT WORKING FOR JEWRY AS A PLANT?...........if so, it WILL be found out and BY ME and you keep your eyes open because you will read it all exposed in the open HERE!. He has already been exposed of having close associations with so called "ex chabadists" and THAT ladies and gentlemen is how enemy dispropaganda is PROPAGANDIZED.

http://www.thelowestroom.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=655

Pickles "right hand", his god is THE BEAST. Its the SON OF MAN, JESUS "THE KIKE" who has kicked God the father of the throne and sits on it yonder in heaven........THE ABOMINATION THAT MAKETH DESOLATE!) Jason Guenther 34th sideline, Pickering Ontario Canada

 www.thelowestroom.com

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ger_toshav

Ger toshav (pl. geirei toshav, Hebrew: גר תושב), according to Judaism and the Torah, is a Gentile who is a "resident alien," that is, one who lived in the ancient kingdoms of Israel under certain protections of the system, considered a righteous Gentile.

There are two kinds of ger toshav. A formal one is a Gentile who has made certain legal statements in a beth din (Jewish rabbinical court). There are three opinions (Avodah Zarah 64b) as to what those statements promise:

accept the Mark of Satan's Beast

  1. To abstain from idolatrous practices (detailed in Deut 29:09-30:20).
  2. To uphold the seven Noahide Laws.

 

 

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/03/chabad-lubavitch-rabbi-to-congress.html

__________

Via the Treasonous House Joint Resolution made by Satan's minions of Hell, HJr 104, PL 102-14

you should understand the Ger Toshav Righteous Shabbos Goyim Immigration Bill

 

http://www.nyulawglobal.org/fellowsscholars/forums/documents/gffrothsteinpaper.pdf

DRAFT: Due to Appear in the Georgetown Immigration Law Journal

Involuntary Particularism: The Noahide Laws, Citizenship, and Alienage1

Gidon Rothstein,

Gruss Scholar in Residence, NYU School of Law

3701 Henry Hudson Pkwy, #5H

Bronx, NY 10463

e-mail: gidonr@att.net, rothstei@juris.law.nyu.edu

W:(212) 998-6566, H:(718) 549-9124

The inherent tension between emphasizing the value of citizenship and extending

a kind hand to aliens has come to the fore in recent scholarly literature. Offering rights

too easily to non-citizens minimizes the value of citizenship itself, a problem for those

who wish to promote strong identification with one’s country.2 The overriding desire to

help aliens, many if not most of whom inhabit difficult lives in the lower socioeconomic

classes of society, spurs others to argue for expanding the rights of lawful permanent

residents (LPR’s), even to where they are indistinguishable from those given to citizens.3

1 I have appended both footnotes and endnotes to this essay; the footnotes list citations and clarify

points in the text. The endnotes take up ancillary issues, those not worth inserting into the text itself.

2 For some examples on the side of strengthening citizenship, see in IMMIGRATION AND

CITIZENSHIP IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY, ed. Noah Pickus, (Lanham: Rowman and

Littlefield, 1998): Charles R. Kesler, The Promise of American Citizenship 3-39, David A. Hollinger,

Nationalism, Cosmopolitanism, and the United States, 85-99, and Noah M. J. Pickus, To Make Natural:

Creating Citizens for the Twenty-First Century, 107-139. Prior to that, important briefs for a stronger

notion of citizenship were published by Frederick Schauer, Community, Citizenship, and the Search for

National Identity 84 MICH. L. REV. (June 1986) 1504-17, Peter H. Schuck, Membership in the Liberal

Polity: The Devaluation of American Citizenship GEORGETOWN IMMIGRATION LAW J. 3:1 (Spring

1989), 1-18, and William N. Eskridge, Jr. The Relationship Between Obligations and Rights of Citizens 69

FORDHAM L. REV. (2001) 1721-1751.

3 For arguments in favor of loosening citizenship rules and/or extending greater rights to aliens

(including Lawful Permanent Residents), see IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP IN THE TWENTYFIRST

CENTURY, ibid, the following chapters: Kwame Anthony Appiah, Citizenship in Theory and

Practice: A Response to Charles Kesler 41-47, Joseph H. Carens, Why Naturalization Should Be Easy: A

Response to Noah Pickus 141-146, and Hiroshi Motomura, Alienage Classifications in a Nation of

Immigrants: Three Models of “Permanent” Residence, as well as T. Alexander Aleinikoff, Citizenship,

Aliens, Membership and the Constitution 7 CONSTITUTIONAL COMMENTARY 1990 9-34, Linda

Bosniak, Universal Citizenship and the Problem of Alienage 94 NORTHWESTERN U. L. REV. (2000)

963-982 and Constitutional Citizenship Through the Prism of Alienage 63 OHIO ST. L. J. (2002) 1285-

1325, and Peter J. Spiro, Questioning Barriers to Naturalization 13 GEORGETOWN IMMIGRATION L.

J. (Summer 1999), 479-519.

2

Underlying the debate is a disagreement about the purpose and value of

citizenship, especially when it is counterpoised to the sticky questions of when or

whether it is proper to discriminate against or deny benefits to people based on their lack

of membership in a certain club. This article suggests reasons why, and a model for how,

to distinguish between citizens and lawful permanent residents.

We do so by extrapolating from a system that articulated the two categories fairly

fully, Jewish law. While Jews were bound by the commandments of the Torah,(Talmud Bavli Mishnah Torah the tradition)  they also

envisioned another set of laws, known as the laws of the sons of Noah or Noahide law,4

which applied to all non-Jews.i While it applies to all human beings, Noahide law also

served as a kind of immigration law, in that the Talmud required non-Jews to agree to

adhere to Noahide laws and standards in order to be allowed to live in a Jewish

commonwealth.5

Jew-risdiction USA HJR 104, PL 102-14 of Itsreallyhell

 That was already only a theoretical possibility for the rabbis of the

Talmud and ever since, but studying their expectations of resident aliens sheds light on

how one group of thinkers balanced a keen interest in a strong sense of citizenship with a

reasonable and fair-minded treatment of outsiders who came to reside among them.

We will see that even at their most universal, Jews were remarkably particularistic

in their expectations of non-Jews.ii Resident aliens in a Jewish polity were required to

accept fairly specific and fundamental aspects of the Jewish worldview; once they did so,

they were welcomed into Jewish society. Since, however, they did not fully attach

4 The term Noahide comes from the Jewish view that all people today descend from Noah. The Talmud

bSANHEDRIN 56a, actually seems to assume that the commandments were originally given to Adam; why

they are referred to as Noahide laws is something of a continuing question, but one that need not detain us

here.

5 See Maimonides, LAWS OF IDOL WORSHIP 10;6, based on bGITTIN 8b. Note that Maimonides

himself prohibits even temporary passage for non-Noahides; Rabad (R. Abraham b. David of Posquieres,

1125-1198) disagrees. Maimonides’ view would argue for an even stricter view of how to treat aliens than

we offer in the text.

3

themselves to the Jewish way of life,(Deny Jesus and worship Satan the Murderer from the beginning)  they also only received some of the benefits of

citizenship.

The particularism of the Noahide laws, we will argue, is simply an example of the

necessary particularism of all legal systems, which always implicitly espouse a particular

worldview in the details of their laws. Citizens are those members of a society who

accept that way of looking at the world, of how society should work, of how citizens need

to treat each other and outsiders, and of the proper ways to work for change and

improvement within that society. 

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/03/chabad-lubavitch-rabbi-to-congress.html

 

Those who wish to fully join in the endeavor of

furthering the prosperity of that society and worldview will become citizens; those who

sympathize with essential aspects of the society but choose not to join it fully cannot then

expect the full benefits of the system that they have chosen not to join.

They Must Deny Jesus and make their oath to Satan

There are two kinds of ger toshav. A formal one is a Gentile who has made certain legal statements in a beth din (Jewish rabbinical court). There are three opinions (Avodah Zarah 64b) as to what those statements promise:

 

 

Those who

refuse to identify with the society’s goals and values in even a limited way should not

expect the right of permanent residence, and perhaps not even residence at all.

See recent Abandonment of the TB patient and Quarantine outside the USA, experiment, also the No Fly which will abandon you in a foreign nation. Once you are abandoned, your visa runs out, then you become an indefinite detention victim.....Midnight Express 

The idea of using Jewish law to reflect on American is not new, but has been

cogently critiqued by Suzanne Last Stone.7 Responding to a trend started by the late

Robert Cover and followed by others,8 Stone argued that such analyses often neglect

6 Some of this work was anticipated by Gordon Lafer, Universalism and Particularism in JEWISH

IDENTITY eds. David Theo Goldberg and Michael Krausz, (Phil.: Temple U. Press, 1993), 177-211.

Lafer, too, explicitly wants to offer a model of universalism and particularism that will be reasonable and

attractive even to liberal theorists. At the same time, p. 183, he refrains from translating the Jewish model

into an American one, assuming that cultural translation can only offer insights, some of which may be

relevant and acceptable to the receiver of that translation. I assume here, instead, that offering my view of

how the Jewish model translates to American culture will jumpstart the process of critiquing that model and

finding the moments of insight that will produce a smooth translation.

7 Suzanne Last Stone, In Pursuit of the Counter-Text: The Turn to the Jewish Legal Model in

Contemporary American Legal Theory 106 HARVARD LAW REVIEW (Feb. 1993), 813-894.

8 Stone mentions S.F. Friedell, The "different voice" in Jewish law: some parallels to a feminist

jurisprudence 67 INDIANA L. J. (Fall 1992), 915-49 and J.W. Singer, The player and the cards: nihilism

and legal theory 94 YALE L. J. (November 1984) p. 1-70. Other examples are William N. Eskridge, Jr.,

supra note 2, who explicitly acknowledges his debt to Cover for the idea that Jewish concepts of obligation

4

features of Jewish law that make it less salient than it might seem. Specifically, she saw

the centrality of divine authority in Jewish law—Judaism’s insistence that adherence to

the law be grounded in the belief that God commanded it—as making this system too

different from secular law to provide useful comparison.9

Three Models of Applying One Legal System to Another

Stone obliquely raises the question of how one system, with its particularistic

assumptions and worldview, can offer meaningful insight for another, a question we

obviously must address before embarking on our endeavor in comparative alienage.

Granting Professor Stone’s point that systems of law are often so different as to prevent

importing elements from one to another, we can still envision three circumstances where

transfer is plausible and appropriate.

By Treason and Blasphemy, this once great Christ believing Nation is now fallen away from the Truth in Righteousness and now a Satan State

First, claims of one system may appeal to the members of the other because they

are convincing within the second group’s own ways of looking at the world.

Jms:4:4: Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

Theoretically, all or most Americans might decide that the Jewish (or Moslem or Russian

or French) view of marriage, or self-defense, or contracts, made sense in an American

context as well, and adjust their laws to incorporate that decision.

 

I stress the importance of naturalizing the innovation into the host context because

I do not want to be misunderstood as arguing in favor of allowing outside systems to

shape that of the United States. 

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/03/chabad-lubavitch-rabbi-to-congress.html

 

 

To claim that the United States should act in a certain

way because God commanded x (or whatever justifies that law for the external system) is

ought to be incorporated into American legal theory and discourse, and Elliot Klayman and Seth Klayman,

Punitive Damages: Toward Torah-Based Tort Reform 23 CARDOZO L. REV. (Nov. 2001), 221-251.

9 Stone, 865-70. What Stone actually says is that Jews’ commit to the practices and messages of their

legal system out of a desire to achieve a relationship with God, a wish that a secular system cannot

replicate.

5

to speak gibberish in the context of the public debate of the United States. 

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/03/chabad-lubavitch-rabbi-to-congress.html

 

For a mixture

of reasons political and principled, this country has long rejected the authority of any but

the most general religious framework in structuring the country’s laws and institutions.

Private belief is a matter of personal conscience, but to be heard in the public arena

requires phrasing oneself in terms that stand independently of any particular religious

belief.

Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg is more determined. He knows that in the near future the Land of Israel is about to expand. He writes, "It is our duty to force all mankind to accept the seven Noahide laws, and if not—they will be killed." (Ma'ariv, 10/6/04)

Even given the restrictions just posited, there will still be circumstances that allow

for the reasonable claim that the United States should adopt another legal system’s view

of a topic. Once we grant that American values and ideals must remain the frame of

reference, we can easily imagine occasions where other systems’ handling of some

national concern seems more effective than current American practice, in a way that does

not diverge from any American values or ideals. 

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/03/chabad-lubavitch-rabbi-to-congress.html

 

In such situations, we could feel free to

adopt that practice in toto.

somewhere over their perverted rainbow with their toto and OZ Moshiach ben Satan

Where that kind of cutting and pasting of law from one system to another is

inappropriate, a second kind of transference would be to adapt the categories of one

system to the other, 

BY Treason

with the details differing from system to system. (Noahide) Nation building

provides a good example, since the nation overseeing the building tries to apply broad

categories—democracy, tolerance, pluralism— while recognizing that they may be

expressed in a vastly different manner than in the original country.10 The resulting laws

10 Note President Bush’s comments in his speech of November 5, 2003, calling for Arab states to move

towards democracy: “…we are mindful that modernization is not the same as Westernization.

Representative governments in the Middle East will reflect their own cultures. They will not, and should

not, look like us. Democratic nations may be constitutional monarchies, federal republics, or parliamentary

systems. And working democracies always need time to develop - as did our own. We've taken a 200-year

journey toward inclusion and justice - and this makes us patient and understanding as other nations are at

different stages of this journey.” Similar views can be found in Noah Feldman’s work, particularly his Op-

Ed, A New Democracy, Enshrined in Faith, NEW YORK TIMES November 13, 2003.

6

reflect the home country, but their underlying categories come from the overseeing

nation.

Occupying REGIME of the One World Talmudic ODOR

The least intrusive model, the one that best fits our current discussion, argues only

for applying the broad themes of one legal system to another. If a religious law insisted

that its members pray a certain number of times a day, a thematic application of that law

could be to recognize its underlying assumption that repeated recitations of formulae help

people deepen their connection to core values. Picking up on the theme, although not its

content, a secular legal system might decide to institute some kind of ritualized recitation,

such as the Pledge of Allegiance 

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/03/chabad-lubavitch-rabbi-to-congress.html

 

or the National Anthem, to help its citizens retain their

sense of connection to the goals of the larger society.

We will here suggest that that last kind of transference would be helpful in

shaping the American discourse about citizenship and alienage. In order to do so,

however, we need to unravel the tangle of claims that Judaism made about Noahide law.

Characterizing Noahide Law

Previous discussions of Noahide law saw it as a form of natural law, where

natural was used as a synonym for intuitive, or a law aimed at developing a minimal

political community. We will show that despite some indications that Jews thought of

Noahide law as rational and minimal, the system actually required non-Jews to

understand and accept fundamental aspects of the Jewish worldview before they could

reside in a Jewish commonwealth.

Thank God for SION My HOME and Jesus my KING

As listed in the Talmud, non-Jews must establish a court system,

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/03/chabad-lubavitch-rabbi-to-congress.html

 

 

iii are prohibited

from committing blasphemy (cursing the Name of God), (Worshipping GOD the WORD) (DENY The WORD, Make an oath to Satan by their Noahide Freemason Courts) idolatry, incest, murder, theft,

and eating part of an animal that was removed before the animal died. The details of

7

those general requirements show that these laws were meant to inculcate a fairly Jewish

view of four central topics: God, society, sexuality, and food.

Previous academic discussions of the Noahide laws have tended to ignore or fail

to recognize its particularism. Hugo Grotius, one of the earliest non-Jewish writers to

speak of Noahide law, characterized it as a Jewish version of ius gentium, the term used

for Roman laws governing relationships between Romans and non-Romans.11 Part of

that characterization is the recognition that these laws evinced a Jewish strategy for how

to deal with strangers in their midst. 

Remember the RED Sofiet Revolution?

Ius gentium was assumed to be a universal law, “an

intercultural law known to all peoples, later portrayed as a universal law flowing from a

natural reason common to all mankind.”12 Grotius saw Noahide law as an early universal

law, the basis for international law.

One World Talmudic Anti-Christ Law

Since the Noahide laws were universal, Grotius and the majority of those who

followed him have assumed that they must be rational, by which they meant that the laws

could be intuited even without any external or divine guidance.13 Some Talmudic

sources also seem to take that view of the issue,iv leading writers such as Moses

Mendelssohn, Martin Buber, and Hermann Cohen,14 as well as contemporary thinkers

11 Alasdair MacIntyre, WHOSE JUSTICE? WHICH RATIONALITY? (U. of Notre Dame: Notre

Dame, 1988), p. 149, first cites Wolfgang Kunkel, AN INTRODUCTION TO ROMAN LEGAL AND

CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY, trans. JM Kelly (Oxford, 1973), p. 77 to point out that the norms of ius

gentium were in fact no more than an extension of Roman law, a description that will be useful in our

consideration of Noahide law. On p. 199, MacIntyre notes that ius gentium was primarily about

relationships between peoples, a characterization we will not find true of Noahide law.

12 Suzanne Last Stone, Cultural Pluralism, Nationalism, and Universal Rights 21 CARDOZO LAW

REVIEW (February 2000), 1213.

13For the sake of clarity, we will refer to such laws as intuitive; we will use the word explicable for laws

that could not be inferred independently, but make sense once they are promulgated. I am avoiding the

words rational and intelligible—which really only mean that the subject makes sense and can be understood

by others, too minimal a claim for those who see Noahide law as a kind of natural law-- since both have

been used ambiguously.

14 For a discussion of each one’s views, see the relevant chapters in David Novak, THE IMAGE OF

THE NON-JEW IN JUDAISM: AN HISTORICAL AND CONSTRUCTIVE STUDY OF THE NOAHIDE

8

such as David Novak and Nahum Rakover,15 to assume that the Noahide laws were a

Jewish vision of an intuitive universal law.

Marvin Fox, however, argued against the concept of natural law in Judaism, in

general and specifically regarding Noahide law.16 Faced with sources that identified

some laws as intuitive, Fox claimed that the Talmud only meant that they were

explicable, that after God had commanded them, they could be explained in a way that all

people would accept as reasonable.

To prove that Noahide laws were not supposed to be intuitive, Fox pointed to

Maimonides’ ruling that observance of these laws earned non-Jews a share in the World

to Come only if they obeyed them as a response to God’s command.17

Their gawd wannabe with no Lamb of Salvation

 Someone who

figures out Noahide law independently, Maimonides wrote, may qualify as wise, but not

as one of the Righteous of the Nations, his term for non-Jews who properly fulfill God’s

wishes.v Insisting on an awareness of divine command, Fox correctly argues, means that

Jews were not satisfied with observance of Noahide law because of its appeal to reason.vi

Rather than argue further about whether Noahide laws were intuitive, it seems

most correct to accept the middle position suggested by Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein,

LAWS (New York: Edwin Mellen, 1983). Note that Novak, NATURAL LAW IN JUDAISM (Cambridge:

Cambridge U. Press, 1998), 147-49, tries to define natural law as something other than that which people

could intuit. He instead suggests that natural law is a catchall term for laws that humans must promulgate

when they come to relate to those outside their communities; it is a law of the limits on behavior that need

to be accepted by those who would interact across community lines. That definition, however, loses the

fundamental goal of natural law theorists, finding a law that was both universally binding and universally

recognizable as such. Once natural law becomes an extension of a particular community, it incorporates

the worldview of that community, which may or may not be universally appreciated.

15 In English, Rakover’s main contributions to the discussion have been Jewish Law and the Noahide

Obligation to Preserve Social Order 12 CARDOZO LAW REVIEW (1991):1073-1136 and LAW AND

THE NOAHIDES: LAW AS A UNIVERSAL VALUE (Jerusalem, 1998), a translation of a previous

Hebrew book on the same topic.

16 Marvin Fox, Maimonides and Aquinas on Natural Law 3 DINE ISRAEL (1972), pp. 10 and 26. See

also J. David Bleich, Judaism and Natural Law 7 JEWISH LAW ANNUAL (1988), 5-42.

17 LAWS OF KINGS 8;11.

9

among others.18 Explicitly avoiding expressing an opinion on the issue of natural law,

Rabbi Lichtenstein noted that Jewish sources certainly assumed the existence of an

intuitive and universally binding morality.19 That morality, however, is not coterminous

with Noahide law, as Norman Lamm and Aaron Kirschenbaum also wrote.20

The details of the Noahide laws we will discuss in a moment lead to that same

conclusion. Our analysis shows that regardless of whether the Noahide laws were

intuitive, their detailsvii go far beyond any kind of intuitive or natural law. Reviewing

these particularistic pieces of Noahide law will reveal the nomos, the underlying vision of

the kind of a world its adherents should inhabit, embedded within Noahide law. To

anticipate, we will find that Noahide laws obligate non-Jews to view themselves as

members of a society dedicated to a joint set of beliefs rather than as individuals free of

positive obligation to the society as a whole, to concede the existence of a single God and

to refrain from rebelling against Him,21 to adopt a radically strict respect for rights to

property and life, to be aware of proper and improper forms of sexuality, and to recognize

18 Not to be confused with Aaron Lichtenstein, author of THE SEVEN LAWS OF NOAH (New York:

RJJ, 1986), to which we refer infra.

19 Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein, Does Jewish Tradition Recognize An Ethic Independent of Halakha?

MODERN JEWISH ETHICS (Ohio State, 1975), 62-4. He does not define that morality fully, but it seems

to share many of the characteristics of the moral minimalism that Michael Walzer speaks of in THICK

AND THIN: MORAL ARGUMENT AT HOME AND ABROAD (Notre Dame: U. of Notre Dame, 1994),

1-21. Of course, since Jewish sources assumed that Noahide law was actually binding on all people

everywhere —and given the thickness of Noahide law I am in the process of demonstrating—Judaism

seems to have assumed that revelation informed the world of a baseline morality much less thin than the

one that all people everywhere could intuitively accept.

20 A. Kirschenbaum and N. Lamm, “Freedom and Constraint in the Jewish Judicial Process” 1

CARDOZO L. REV. (Spring, 1979), p. 120ff. See also Bleich, Judaism and Natural Law, supra note , pp.

13-25.

21 Several adjunct rules for Noahides—prohibitions that the Talmud saw as capital crimes, but did not

imagine a human court punishing—indicate that they were also expected to recognize the special status of

the Jews, see infra.

10

the seriousness of making use of animals as food. 

Soilent Green world full of apostate Satan worshipper zombies controlled by their self exalted massah race of wanna be gods

After proving those generalizations,

we can consider what that suggests about American law.

Dinim—A Social System

The commandment to establish courts has received too much attention for us to

meaningfully summarize it here.

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/03/chabad-lubavitch-rabbi-to-congress.html

 

22 Two aspects of the commandment, though, show that

it was geared towards forming a sense of a cohesive society, not just one that headed off

conflict among its inhabitants.viii

The accuracy of that view of the law depends on which position we accept in a

medieval disagreement about the scope of the obligation. In his codification of the law,

Maimonides added that this commandment explained why all the people of Shechem23 --

in the Biblical story of the abduction and rape of Dinah-- deserved their deaths at the

hands of Simeon and Levi. In Maimonides’ view, all those present were capitally

obligated to protest and judge their prince’s abduction of Dinah, the daughter of Jacob;

Jn:16:2: They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.

 

their failure to do so made them liable for death.ix More than just solving the theological

problem of how Simeon and Levi, generally admired in Jewish tradition, could commit

mass murder, Maimonides here expresses a forceful view of non -Jews’ responsibility to

insure the observance of the Noahide laws.

Mt:10:17: But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues;

Mt:10:19: But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.

Mt:24:9: Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

Mk:13:9: But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them.

Mk:13:11: But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost.

His assumption of extensive observer-responsibility is itself certainly not

intuitive, as shown, at the very least, by Nahmanides’ (a thirteenth century Catalonian

22 See Novak, supra note 14 , and Rakover, supra note .

23 GENESIS 34.

11

Talmudist and Biblical commentator) rejecting it.24 Nahmanides instead sees the

obligation of dinim as mandating the establishment of a system of civil law.x He did not

set clear parameters for what this system had to cover, but gave numerous examples,

including “theft, overcharging, withholding wages, bailments, rape and seduction, torts,

lending, business, and so on.”25

Although Nahmanides does not fully define that civil law, the sixteenth-century

R. Moses Isserles assumed that non-Jews had to adopt Jewish law in these areas.26

Jewish civil law, let us note, is certainly not intuitive; its laws are derived, analyzed, and

elaborated in extensive and complex Biblical and Talmudic discussions, with debates at

most stages of the process, indicating that even those who grew up in the system were not

able to intuit the law in any simple manner. Isserles, too, would have to be placed on the

list of those who see Noahide law as particularistic.

Even if Nahmanides thought that dinin meant that non-Jews would make their

own laws,27 he may still not have thought of those laws as intuitive. Rather, he may have

assumed that the types of laws were intuitive, but that there was a range of equally

acceptable laws dealing with the issues raised by those areas of law. In addition, his

allowing non-Jews to write their own laws in this area implies that the rest of the system,

where they did not have such power, was not accessible to intuitive rule-making.

24 COMMENTARY TO THE TORAH, trans. C. Chavel, GENESIS 34;13.

25 COMMENTARY ON GENESIS 34;13. Nahmanides incorporated an obligation to set up a court

system in this set of laws as well, but as a positive obligation, not a possible capital crime.

26 RESPONSA REMA, 10. R. Moses Sofer, RESPONSA HATAM SOFER 6:14 and R. Eliezer

Waldenburg, RESPONSA TSITS ELIEZER 16;55 analyze Rema’s view at length, and Sofer at least seems

to accept it.

27 As did R. Naftali Zevi Yehudah Berlin, in his commentary on R. Ahai Gaon’s SHEILTOT,

HAAMEK SHE’ELAH. Berlin pointed out that Psalms 147;20—“He has not done so to any nation, nor

has he informed them of laws [mishpatim]” seems to assume that Jewish civil law was given only to Jews.

12

Whether we follow Maimonides or Nahmanides in either of his versions, then, we have

only a weak form of natural law, and much of Noahide law left unexplained.xi

Although these perspectives of the commandment differ sharply from each other,

they nonetheless each envision non-Jews as obligated to create a cohesive society rather

than just avoiding conflict among citizens. This is most clear for Maimonides, who sees

the Noahides as capitally responsible for the behavior of others in their society. For

Nahmanides and Isserles, the scope of laws they required still goes beyond the minimal

needs of a working society.xii

Rv:20:4: And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

One final aspect of dinin is the Talmud’s assumption that each of the seven

Noahide laws was punishable by death, including theft of a minimal amount of money.28

This severity of punishment gives the impression that adhering to the standards of the

seven Noahides was the bare minimum that justified human existence; violating any of

these laws, to any extent, meant that the person had forfeited the right to life

Mt:10:39: He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.

That, too,

is not only not intuitive, but makes a very Jewish assumption, that one’s right to life

depends on adhering to standards of behavior set by God (Satan their Talmudic gawd wannabe)  rather than by man.

God—Idolatry

The commandments to forego all idolatry and to refrain from blasphemy obligate

non-Jews in monotheistic belief29 and a basic submission to the Creator within a Jewish

model

Judeo- Churchinsanity Noahide anti-Christ

Considering that paganism was alive and well in the societies where Jews lived in

the time of the Mishnah and the Talmud—Christianity did not conquer the Roman world

28 The contrast with Jews, who would not incur the death penalty for some of these same acts, needs to

be discussed fully in a different context. Suzanne Last Stone provides insightful commentary, from a

different perspective of Noahide law than suggested here, in Sinaitic and Noahide Law: Legal Pluralism in

Jewish Law CARDOZO L. REV. 12 (1991), 1179.

29 One of the prohibited forms of idol worship is accepting the idol as a God.

13

until the fourth century, and Persia was a pagan society even beyond that time-- it is

unreasonable to claim that Jews thought that these rules were intuitive.xiii Talmudic

references to the explicability of the prohibition of idol worship meant only that non-Jews

could readily understand why Jews, who believed in one God, would see idol worship as

violating their mores.xiv

In particular, the rules about idol worship force non-Jews to learn and understand

Jewish views of what it means to worship a deity. 

Not Jesus who is Christ the LORD

We can easily understand that non-

Jews would be prohibited from worshipping any idol according to its ordinary manner of

worship (ke-darkah); what becomes more surprising is the system’s calling for the death

penalty for a non-Jew who bows down, offers incense, sacrifices, or libates to an idol;30

in contrast, other acts of admiration and love for the idol—kissing, hugging, washing,

dusting-- do not incur the death penalty. 

I Bow down before Jesus the Christ, Satan until you are cast into the PIT of Death and HELL

The included forms of worship make the list

because they were the ones that could constitute an avodat penim, an act of worship that

occurred within the sanctuary of the Temple itself.

When a system asserts that particular acts count as worship regardless of the

interpretation of those acts in the minds of the people performing them, it is privileging

those acts, announcing that Temple (Chuchinsanity)  forms of worship carry an objective weight not true

of other forms of affection or obeisance. To adhere to this law properly and avoid the

death penalty, non-Jews would have to engage and understand Jewish rules for each of

these kinds of worship.31

See talmudic Televangelist Tellytubby's of HELL judaizers of HELL

30 bSANHEDRIN 60b.

31 LAWS OF KINGS, 9;2, based on bSANHEDRIN 56b, which ties a Noahide’s liability into a Jew’s

being killed by a court for his worship. It would be possible for a non-Jew to ignore the Temple element of

the prohibition and just learn the technicalities of the types of worship for which a Jew would be punished.

Even so, he would have to learn a Jewish view of idol worship in order to live his Noahide life.

14

Although non-Jews could obey the Noahide blasphemy regulation without any

particularly Jewish knowledge—the law simply prohibits cursing God, using any term

that clearly refers to Him32-

FATHER IN HEAVEN

- non-Jews are nonetheless being required to recognize and

accept Judaism’s views of the consequences of certain kind of behavior towards God.

Murder

Criminalizing murder is intuitive, but the particular rules codified by Noahide

laws are not nearly as obvious. The killing of either a fetus (abortion) or a person who

will certainly die within a defined period of time, or bringing about someone’s death

indirectly but deliberately (such as by tying her up in a place where a train will run over

her) all qualify as capital murder in the Noahide system.33 American society’s raging

debate about abortion and assisted suicide shows that these are not intuitive rules; more

than that, these rules show that the Noahide system expected people to treat all human

life, however underdeveloped or certain to end, as out of bounds to human decisions

about when it should end.34

Incest

Incest laws as a class may be intuitive,35 but the Noahide version is certainly not.

Maimonides concluded that non-Jewish men were prohibited from engaging in

intercourse with their mothers, father’s wives, married women, maternal sisters, men, and

32 LAW OF KINGS 9;3.

33 Ibid., 9;4.

34 The seriousness of these rules has led some to question whether Noahides were allowed to wage war;

for discussion, see J. David Bleich, CONTEMPORARY HALAKHIC PROBLEMS II (New York: KTAV,

1983), 159-66.

35 Although, interestingly, Nahmanides was unsure of the reason for the prohibition; rejecting

Maimonides’ view that it was aimed at lessening human sexuality generally, he instead viewed the matter

as an esoteric secret, see his commentary to LEVITICUS 18;6.

15

animals,36 primarily based on the Talmudic parsing of the first verse in Scripture that

discusses human marriage. The verse reads “therefore shall a man leave his mother and

father and cleave to his wife and they shall be one flesh,”37 which allows the Talmud to

assert that sexuality cannot be expressed with one’s parents (since the man is supposed to

leave his parents, with the father’s wife standing in for the father himself), must create a

physical cleaving of the sort that only men and women can create (not men and men),38

The Laws of Christ Jesus are in the heart not by FORCE of Satan

must be with one’s own wife as opposed to somebody else’s, and must be of the kind of

union that could turn them into one flesh, which rules out bestiality.

Sexuality, in this presentation, is an extension of marriage; only those

relationships that could be marital are allowed.39 Marriage, and therefore sex, could only

happen outside the original nuclear family and only with partners who could theoretically

lead to offspring.40 Even without insisting that sex happen only within marriage,

Noahide law was requiring that it take the form of a marital act, and that it not interfere in

any preexisting marriage.xv

Theft

Like murder, theft is intuitive, but the Noahide reaction to it goes beyond what

intuition would urge. Theft of even the most minimal amounts of money, even if the

36 LAWS OF KINGS 9;5-8. Other medieval scholars interpreted the Talmudic discussion differently,

but the details are unimportant for our purposes. Note that Maimonides devotes significantly more space to

his discussion of incest and of eating a limb cut off of a living animal than to the other Noahide laws,

perhaps because these were least intuitive.

37 GENESIS 2;24.

38 Again, the assumption that homosexuality is prohibited is not intuitive, either in Talmudic times or

our own; its inclusion in the Noahide laws is an expression of the view that sexuality must create a manwoman

bond.

39 Although non-Jews have no obligation to marry every time they wish to engage in sexual intercourse,

see Maimonides, LAWS OF MARRIAGE 1;4.

40 This is particularly true given that Rashi, in his Commentary to the verse in Genesis, reads the “one

flesh” as meaning the baby that a couple could produce.

16

victim of the theft is himself not the rightful owner, incurs the death penalty. 

SEE Talmudic Bankruptcy and their Talmudic Arbitration Rules of their Three Judge and or Talmudic Noahide Arbiters

In the most

extreme example, if one non-Jew steals a minimal amount of money from a thief who

himself stole that money, both would be liable for death.xvi

GOOD LORD PEOPLE am I the ONLY HUMAN on this earth who understands?

 More than seeking to protect

property, which could be done through less extreme measures, Noahide law was making

clear that violating others’ rights to their possessions forfeited one’s own right to life in

that society.

Ever Min haHay—The Limbs of a Living Animal

Those who see Noahide law as either a natural law (See Judge Roy Moore shem sham of shame) or a minimal political law

identify the prohibition of ever min hahay, eating the limb of an animal that was removed

while it was still alive, as an issue of cruelty to animals.41 That would be true if the rule

forbade cutting off the limb of an animal, but it only actually prohibits eating a limb that

was cut off before the animal’s death. 

All of these other Laws are HYPE and BULL to take your attention away from Jesus and worshipping HIM alone. Note how they went from Immigration to this CRAP of HELL of ANTICHRIST of the LOWESTROOMS of Filthy arrogance?

 

We need to focus on what the rule addresses in

trying to understand its purpose in the code.

Recalling that Jewish tradition thought that Adam was not allowed to eat meat at

all42 suggests that ever min hahay (limb from a living animal) was a food prohibition, not

a cruelty one. 

Mk:7:8: For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.

Mk:7:9: And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.


Mk:7:13: Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye

 

When, after the Flood, God allowed people to eat meat (in Judaism’s

reconstruction of early human history), He required them to insure that the meat was dead

before they ate it. Animals were now acceptable sources of food, but they only became

so after they had died or been killed. The seriousness of the prohibition was to stress how

off limits animals were expected to be while they were still alive.

41 A. Enker, Aspects of Interaction Between the Torah Law, the King’s Law, and the Noahide Law in

Jewish Criminal Law 12 CARDOZO LAW REVIEW 3-4 (Feb.-March, 1991), 1147. David Novak, supra

note 14, 245, sees all the possible “min hahay” prohibitions, such as meat from a living animal and blood

from a living animal, as violations of the order of nature. Aaron Lichtenstein, THE SEVEN LAWS OF

NOAH, 2d ed. (New York: RJJ School, 1986), 56 sees the rule as teaching two principles, the first of which

is cruelty to animals. His other reason is the one we suggest in the text.

42 bSANHEDRIN 59b.

17

Taken together, the seven Noahide laws thus obligate those who would live as

resident aliens in a Jewish society to accept fundamental Jewish ideas in four areas of

life—the relationship to God, to sex, to others’ lives and property, and to food. Resident

aliens would not need to become Jews to be tolerated,43 but they would have to accept

and adopt basic Jewish beliefs in realms that go to the core of human self-perception.

Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg is more determined. He knows that in the near future the Land of Israel is about to expand. He writes, "It is our duty to force all mankind to accept the seven Noahide laws, and if not—they will be killed." (Ma'ariv, 10/6/04)

 

Were this the entirety of Noahide law, it would already teach us a great deal about

how Jews expected the non-Jews in their midst to live.44

 

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/03/chabad-lubavitch-rabbi-to-congress.html

 

 

 To round out the picture of

Noahide law, however, we need to consider two more aspects of that system, its

codifying rules that emphasize the differences between Noahides and Jews and its

expectation that Noahides would go beyond these rules and observe a set of unenforced

obligations.

Acknowledging Their Otherness

Pure Filthy Racism of the Forged People of Satan

 

Although the status of a ger toshav, the Jewish legal term for a lawful permanent

resident of a Jewish commonwealth, earned the non-Jew equal support in the minimal

social welfare network,45 

Bye bye satanic "Social Security Mammon"

several rules highlight the system’s insistence that non-Jews

remember, recognize, and respect their status as outsiders

Yep, Indeed the saints of Christ Jesus are certainly "OUTSIDERS" who want NO part of Satan's Hoodlum haha of HELL of the MOTHER Harlot Mystery Babylon the WHORE

First, the Sifre, an extra-

Talmudic collection of authoritative Scriptural inferences, rules that even such non-Jews

may not live in Jewish cities.46 The requirement to set up separate communities stresses

43 This toleration, I would point out, is not the same as the American model; since it is basically a

religious system, it is more akin to the Ottoman millet system described in M. Walzer, ON TOLERATION

(New Haven: Yale, 1997), 17-18.

44 Too, the Talmud records other laws that some included in the Noahide corpus, but we can again

ignore those in our current context.

45 Jews are required to support the non-Jewish poor as well as their own, see Maimonides, LAWS OF

GIFTS TO THE POOR 7;1 and Rabad’s gloss to LAWS OF PROHIBITED RELATIONS 14;8.

46 SIFRE, DEUTERONOMY 259. Rabad, ibid, assumes that Maimonides would maintain that rule

even today, while he himself only draws that distinction when the Jewish commonwealth is fully

functional.

18

that they are being accepted and tolerated, but only as outsiders; full inclusion requires

conversion.

Indeed Maraka the Apostate, your so called Elected TREASONOUS Vipers of HELL think of you as their "LESSERS"

 

Similar themes underlie Talmudic statements about the significance of a non-Jew

striking a Jew, observing the Sabbath, and studying Torah. In each case, the Talmudic

rhetoric stresses that non-Jews need to accept that they are not part of the special

community that Jews view themselves to be. In the first example, the Talmud

characterizes a non-Jew striking a Jew as akin to striking God. 

Strike Satan with the TWO Edged Sword of TRUTH Saints of Jesus Christ

That phrasing emphasizes

the Talmud’s assumption of Jewish exceptionalism, that the Jews’ more detailed legal

system gives them a special status as God’s representatives on earth. As such, striking a

Jew becomes more than a simple tort, it becomes an offense against God Himself.47

Rv:11:4: These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

The other two examples involve areas of Jewish life that were seen as so

particular to Jews that non-Jews were not allowed to take part; the Talmud assumed, in

fact, that God would treat non-Jews’ trespassing these boundaries as a capital crime.

Study of Torah was seen as the vehicle of a unique bond between God and the Jewish

people,48 so that a non-Jew who studied Torah was breaking into this bond, and deserving

of death.49 

Goodbye Cruel Satanic World

The right to take a day a week to cease all productive activity—the Sabbath--

was also seen as a special gift to the Jewish people; humans in general had to devote

every day to being productive, to contributing to the settlement of the world.xvii

Shabbos Goyim

47 bSANHEDRIN 58b with Maimonides, LAWS OF KINGS, 10;6.

48 bSANHEDRIN 59a.

49 This prohibition is not nearly as exclusionary as it seems; non-Jews were certainly allowed to study

the Noahide laws, which, as we saw supra in our discussion of Nahmanides’ view of dinin, could be quite

extensive. In addition, as we will see infra, if a non-Jew wished to keep laws other than the Noahides, he or

she would be free to study those laws as well. It was studying Torah as a self-contained activity which the

Talmud meant to limit to Jews, since that study is an act of worship of God granted only to Jews.

19

Part of being a resident alien in a Jewish land, then, was recognizing the limits

that status placed on participating in the majority society. Full participation was readily

available, but only to those who actually converted to the culture, lifestyle, and, in this

case, religion of the majority.

Mt:23:15: Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.

 

Positive Aspects of Noahide Law

Until now we have only reviewed the prohibitions of Noahide law, but several

sources suggest that there were positive expectations as well. A tantalizing Talmudic

statement as well as non-Jews’ right to voluntarily accept specific mitsvot highlight the

system’s assumption that codified Noahide law was just the minimum; non-Jews were

expected to supplement the prohibitions of Noahide law with (self-initiated) practices that

give positive content to their spiritual existence.50

In Tractate Hullin,xviii the Talmud mentions that non-Jews accepted thirty positive

commandments, although it hastens to add that they only managed to stay faithful to

three of those.xix Without trying to fully unpack the statement, it clearly shows the

Talmud’s approval of non-Jews’ independently legislating obligations outside of the

original Noahide corpus.

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/03/chabad-lubavitch-rabbi-to-congress.html

 

 

That statement, somewhat off the beaten path of the Talmudic discussion of non-

Jews,xx could not on its own support a claim that they were expected to develop a positive

relationship with God as well. In the midst of its discussion of the Noahide laws,

however, the Talmud notes that its list includes only prohibitions, not requirements of

action,51 suggesting that there might be an extensive set of positive obligations not clearly

50 These would be what Joseph Carens refers to as aspirations, see idem, supra note 3, p. 142.

51 bSANHEDRIN 58b-59a. To the extent that classical sources do not carefully outline a set of

responsibilities, they implicitly assume wide latitude for those who seek to fulfill the general goals

mentioned.

20

codified in the Talmud. Indeed, the next sentence asserts that non-Jews must exercise

justice,52 while other Talmudic statements assume that non-Jews were required to give

charity and to bear children.53

Taking that positive obligation seriously means that Jews saw non-Jews as

obligated by a law that taught them basic propositions about life, but that also reminded

them to expand that minimal law in positive ways. Somewhat similar to Adam’s original

mandate to “work and preserve” God’s garden, non-Jews were supposed to bear children,

give charity, set up a just society, and live productive lives, with the exact definition of

those later terms left open to the sincere judgment of the non-Jews involved.xxi

SLAVERY to the Master Race wannabe's of Satan

 

Adopting Jewish Versions of Worship

For those non-Jews uncomfortable with such an open-ended set of requirements,

one more option was available, an option that is particularly surprising in light of our

earlier discussion. Jewish authorities generally assumed a non-Jew’s right to observe any

commandments of the Torah other than the Sabbath and Torah study and to be rewarded

by God for that action. Most surprisingly, Maimonides allows a Jew to circumcise a non-

Jew, as long as the non-Jew intends the act to fulfill the Biblical commandment of

circumcision.

Yeah well keep your lilly livered, yellow backed, limp wristed, panty wasted, purple lipped, head bobbing, Goober Slurping Hasidic Lips of MO'Hell away from me VIPERS of HELL !

I demand any of you apostate Judeo-Marakan's of HELL to Challenge and REFUTE THIS.... And ALL of you who read this and DO not Stand UP, Then let your souls see Eternal Shame and death and HELL you Deserve

52 As opposed to just avoiding committing injustice.

53 For giving charity, see the discussion bSANHEDRIN 57b, which excludes women from functioning

as judges, and then asserts that GENESIS 18;19’s reference to Abraham’s commanding his children,

including women, to do justice and righteousness meant to teach the boys to do justice and the women to

give charity. Note that the Talmud is assuming that God’s characterization of Abraham is a model for how

non-Jews were expected to behave, so that Abraham, before becoming the progenitor of the Jewish people,

was first an exemplary non-Jew. In terms of childbearing, bSANHEDRIN 59b seems to obligate only

Jews, as noted by Tosafot ad loc, but bGITTIN 41a-b and bYEVAMOT 62a assume a Noahide

responsibility to have children as well, as already codified in the eighth century SHEILTOT of R. Aha of

Shevaha, no. 165.

21

I note this in particular because the Bible and Talmud54 assume that circumcision,

like the Sabbath, created a covenant between God and the Jewish people;55 letting non-

Jews circumcise without any intention of converting allows them into a circle that might

otherwise be clearly thought of as exclusive to the Jewish people.xxii

BITE THIS ! Hasidic MOHELLS of Satan's Shame

The question of how open Judaism is to the performance of its commandments by

non-Jews is vigorously debated,xxiii but it offers at least one option for fleshing out a non-

Jew’s obligations towards God. That does not mean that non-Jews are supposed to

undertake such obligations, or that these obligations are the only way for a non-Jew to

have a successful relationship with God. Jewish writers’ raising that possibility, though,

offers one final proof that Noahide law was not seen as the end of a non-Jew’s road, but

the minimum base from which to build a fulfilled relationship with God.

Translating Jewish Law to American Immigration Concerns

We have seen that a Jewish commonwealth would demand that any resident aliens

in its midst adopt practices that inculcate and observe fundamental principles of the larger

Jewish society. Those resident aliens would have to see themselves as members of a

society that prevented injustice, they would have to recognize only a single God whom

they could not blaspheme, they would have to strictly respect the sanctity of property that

was not their own and of life, and they would have to limit their intake of animal flesh to

that of animals that were already dead.

Road Kill

 Beyond that, they were supposed to adopt

54 For example, bSHABBAT 132a, which assumes that the right to circumcise on Shabbat is more

obvious than the right to perform other commandments that would ordinarily be seen as violations of

Shabbat because GENESIS 17 uses the term berit, covenant, thirteen times in its discussion of

circumcision.

55 Or, at least, the descendants of Abraham, see Maimonides’ comments on the descendants of Keturah,

LAWS OF KINGS 10;8. Maimonides, in fact, assumes that all Arabs should perform circumcision on the

eighth day, since the descendants of Ishmael have been mixed with those of Keturah.

22

positive goals such as childbearing and giving charity, and, more broadly, developing a

vision and a practice of how to serve the single God.

The universalist model of having one legal system inform another would argue for

the United States to adopt the entire Noahide system.

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/03/chabad-lubavitch-rabbi-to-congress.html

 Since Jewish law thought of this as

the bare minimum of acceptable society, Jews might hope that any non-Jewish society

would adopt those laws as well. Fine for the traditionalist and believer,56 that model only

works for those already convinced of the second system’s greater rightness than the first.

The second option does not concede nearly as much to Noahide law. In a

structural adaptation, we would note that Noahide law picked on God, society (meaning

property and personal rights and safety), sexuality, and food as areas to legislate for

resident aliens. Taking the categories but not the content, we might then argue that

resident aliens should be specifically regulated in those areas as well. Here too, however,

Professor Stone’s complaint about trying to import what is essentially a religious system

into what is essentially a secular one still rings true.

What the Noahide system does suggest, however, is a general social principle that

current U.S. law ignores. That is, Noahide law stresses, inter alia, that Jewish society

stands for different values than other societies.

Pastor.......Do Ah heah and ALLMAN?????????????

 

 Those who would join that society, even

partially, must be introduced to, and accept upon themselves, at least fundamental aspects

of that society’s worldview. Full citizens, of course, need to accept the whole picture;

partial citizens—and anyone allowed to live in a society for the rest of his or her natural

life is certainly a partial citizen—need to accept less, but at least the basic beliefs of that

society and commit to promoting their continued welfare.

56 A Google search for “Noahide” turned up more than 5,000 hits, among them several sites dedicated

to delineating and promoting observance of the Noahide laws.

23

That becomes relevant to this country when we remember that every society, no

matter how universalist in its rhetoric, actually espouses a particular worldview, both in

terms of definition of the good life and of how to get there. Robert Cover noted twenty

years ago that law always constitutes a nomos, a vision of an ideal world towards which

that society strives.57 Stanley Fish repeatedly reminds his readers of how much every

human being and every society is locked into its own assumptions about how the world

does and should work.58

"WE The PEOPLE" and Damned you all treasonous Blasphemers of HELL

Recognizing this necessary aspect of our-- and any-- culture can help us articulate

a vision both of citizenship and of alienage. Citizens are members of a society dedicated

to a particular set of ideals and a worldview of how best to actualize those ideals in

practice. Of course, in countries like the U.S. where citizenship is granted by birth, an

educational process has to occur to ready children to become proper adult citizens, but

the goal of that education is to inculcate whatever the society sees as its central values

and processes.

In addition, that self-definition needs to be adjusted frequently, as societies

change over time. The United States today would not define itself exactly as the

Founding Fathers would have, so that we could not simply expect prospective citizens to

read their writings and declare them ready for citizenship. But American society does

57 Robert M. Cover, Foreword: Nomos and Narrative 97 HARVARD L. REV. 4 (1983-4), 4-68,

reprinted in NARRATIVE, VIOLENCE, AND THE LAW: THE ESSAYS OF ROBERT COVER eds. M.

Minow, M. Ryan, and A. Sarat (U. of Michigan: Ann Arbor, 1993).

58 Fish, THERE’S NO SUCH THING AS FREE SPEECH (New York: Oxford, 1994) and THE

TROUBLE WITH PRINCIPLE (Cambridge: Harvard, 1999) are two of the recent examples. Clifford

Geertz’ work, THE INTERPRETATION OF CULTURES (New York: Basic Books, 1973) and LOCAL

KNOWLEDGE (New York: Basic Books, 1983) also points out that the complex interaction of all the

various parts of society, the thick description of its culture, work together to articulate a particular vision.

See, too, Alasdair MacIntyre, WHOSE JUSTICE? WHICH RATIONALITY? (Notre Dame: U. of Notre

Dame, 1988).

24

differ from the rest of world, and the extent of a person’s acceptance of and participation

in those differences should determine his or her acceptance in that society.

It is not my intent here to articulate or promote my own view of those defining

ideals, since more qualified people have already done so, from many perspectives, and I

have no reason to think that my own vision is more persuasive than that of others. What

seems unequivocal, though, is that the United States, as a society, stands for important

and significant ideals, and that part of citizenship is embracing those ideals, certainly

theoretically, and, where possible, actively.

Two responses to this claim might be that a) the U.S. makes an ideal of giving its

citizens the freedom not to care about the welfare of the society and b) that, empirically,

Americans do not share any common set of ideals. To the first, I concede that the

freedom to be apathetic is part of our conception of freedom, but that does not mean that

we promote it; part of our vision of a tolerant society is that we do not penalize action or

inaction just because we find it distasteful. Our allowing citizens to remain ignorant of

this society’s goals and welfare, then, does not indicate our condoning their so doing.

That the bonds of American society have frayed in recent years is also readily

conceded; part of the goal of this article is to call for rearticulating the general principles

around which we all can rally. Whether those ideals are electoral democracy,

individualism, libertarianism, equality of all peoples, or some combination of those and

other ideals I have left off the list, a vigorous debate about how to properly articulate the

fundamental beliefs of this country should go far to reminding Americans of how much

they share in common, regardless of their beliefs about abortion, homosexuality, or other

hot-button issues today.

25

Coming to some consensus about what we mean by citizenship would inherently

allow us to improve our education of our citizens towards that citizenship,59 and to make

citizenship more than just membership in a club, or a set of rights and even of

obligations.60 The full rights and responsibilities of being an American would devolve to

those who accept and adhere to the American worldview, and to furthering the prosperity

of the society that adopts that worldview.xxiv

My main concern here, though, is with aliens. Recognizing the nomos aspect of

law, we can better identify what separates Americans from non-citizens. Resident aliens,

who have been granted the right to live in this country for the rest of their lives, are not

required to commit to such fundamental American ideals as rule of law, tolerance of

others, individual rights, and so on.61

This lacuna in the law becomes all the more remarkable when we recognize the

truth of Alexander Aleinikoff’s claim that once immigrants are accepted as LPR’s,

naturalization is relatively routine.62 If the biggest hurdle for a non-American to get to

this country is securing a permanent visa, it should be at that point that we insure that the

59 As discussed by Amy Gutmann, DEMOCRATIC EDUCATION, (Princeton: Princeton U., 1999).

60 As noted by Cover, but more recently by Eskridge, supra note 8.

61 The law does require such commitments of nonimmigrants who seek adjustment of status after

arriving in the U.S., INA § 245. Those who get their visas abroad, either for family reunification,

employment, diversity, or asylum reasons are not, as far as I have been able to ascertain, required to

commit to any version of American ideals. The rules for becoming a citizen are available in many sources.

A simple summary of those rules can be found in the INS’ Guide to Naturalization, available in pdf format

at http://www.immigration.gov/graphics/services/natz/English.pdf. For a more technical description, there

are any number of legal handbooks and casebooks. I used Immigration and Nationality Law Handbook,

2000-2001: Vol. I Immigration Basics R. Auerbach, ed. in chief, (American Immigration Lawyers Assoc.,

Washington, DC).

62 T. Alexander Aleinikoff, Citizenship, Aliens, Membership and the Constitution 7

CONSTITUTIONAL COMMENTARY (1990), 15. Others, including Linda Bosniak, Universal

Citizenship and the Problem of Alienage 94 NORTHWESTERN U. L. REV. 3 (Spring 2000), 963 and

Peter J. Spiro, Questioning Barriers to Naturalization, 13 GEORGETOWN IMMIGRATION L. J. 4 (1999)

dispute the ease of naturalization, noting especially the barrier presented by language requirements.

26

prospective immigrant in fact sympathizes with the American Project (or Creed or

Dream).

Seed of Greed Creed Telly Tubby Televangelist Dream

Of course, we cannot expect them to immediately accept all the facets of that

project. Luckily, as Michael Walzer points out, worldviews can be expressed in thicker

and thinner forms.63 The Noahide laws, we have shown, were a thinner form of the thick

Jewish worldview, dealing only with the most central issues and in a much more

attenuated form than in the system as a whole. Translated to American terms, LPR’s

could be required, upon arrival (or before leaving their home countries) to commit to

some modest version of that American Creed, enough of it that the United States can feel

comfortable with their commitment to join American society to a minimal extent.64

Aside from suggesting that America needs to articulate its worldview clearly, both

for its citizens and for those who would at least partially join American society, the

Noahide model promotes a particular view of language requirements, aliens’ rights, dual

citizenship, and the “transitional” model of alienage suggested by Hiroshi Motomura.

The requirement for citizens to demonstrate proficiency in English has come

under attack in some articles, on the grounds that prospective citizens can understand and

accept their responsibilities in other languages as well. Remembering that a legal system

represents a worldview strongly suggests including language proficiency in the

citizenship requirement. Language shapes how people think and express themselves;65

63 Michael Walzer, THICK AND THIN (Notre Dame: U. of Notre Dame, 1994).

64 I recognize, as Noah Pickus points out, supra note 2, p. 123, that people can lie; nonetheless,

demanding a commitment of people is a strong educational tool for the majority. While some will simply

utter the words without taking them seriously, many (citizens as well) will internalize the values thus

articulated as part of their conduct of themselves in American society.

65 This has been pointed out numerous times; I most recently saw it in Marian Sigman and Lisa Capps,

CHILDREN WITH AUTISM: A DEVELOPMENTAL PERSPECTIVE (Cambridge: Harvard U. Press,

1997).

27

once we recognize that law inherently inculcates a worldview, it makes sense to require

citizens to be able to think and express themselves in the language of the system.

Rights, Noahide law points out, come in three versions. There are the rights of

human beings by virtue of their humanity, rights of partial members of society-- as

recognition of partial common cause-- and rights of citizens, which express the fraternity

and mutual fructification that comes with sharing a particular worldview.66

Rights in America ought to work the same way. Some minimal rights of welfare

should be extended to all those present in society (regardless of citizenship status), simply

because they are human beings in our midst. Those who come to join society partially,

by accepting permanent residence, would have access to a broader, but not complete, set

of rights.67 The differentiation is not for its own sake, but as part of reminding ourselves

and others that the nomos of America is what allows the society to flourish, and the full

benefits of that flourishing properly devolve only to those who are sworn to promoting

the country’s continued welfare.

The articulation of the American creed will also help answer dual citizenship

questions. There are numerous countries in the world which, while not holding to the

same nomos as the United States, are nonetheless close enough to predict few times of

conflict for citizens of both. Other countries’ worldviews present much more significant

problems for citizens’ ability to serve both countries fully at the same time. Rather than

deciding on dual citizenship as a general policy, the Noahide example suggests that

political decisions would need to be made about each country separately, to see whether

66 As articulated well by Hollinger, supra note 2. Hollinger calls for also developing a national

narrative to express our core ideals.

67 Differentiating those rights would again need to be a political process; I think we would want to try to

distinguish between privileges and rights; LPRs would get the latter but not the former.

28

its worldview corresponds well enough to the American one to expect that citizens could

reasonably identify with both countries at the same time.

Finally, the Noahide example suggests that Hiroshi Motomura’s argument in

favor of granting LPRs certain rights so as to foster their transition to citizenship68 should

be encased in some other rubric. When immigrants arrive in this country, they might be

asked whether they intend to become citizens after the waiting period or not. Those who

assert their intent to naturalize could be given a wider basket of benefits immediately, to

foster their transition, as Motomura suggested. Of course, if they failed to naturalize after

some set period of time, they would revert to ordinary LPRs, with the more limited rights

and benefits involved.

Noahide law in the Jewish system thus highlights one model of how to deal with

outsiders who wish to come into a nation’s midst. To the extent that they intend to

remain outsiders, the host society nonetheless has to insure that they understand and

respect the central and crucial values of that society. In doing so, the aliens become

partial members with access to some of the benefits of membership.

Putting such a system into place—the practical lesson I would recommend

drawing from our study of the Noahide system-- requires clearly articulating our central

values, or at least engaging in a political process to decide what form those values take at

the present historical moment. That statement of values can strengthen citizenship, both

birthright and naturalized, making it more than a set of rights or membership in a club,

turning it into a commitment and an obligation to participate in fostering the good health

of the society that articulates this particular view of the world.

68 See Motomura, supra note 3, 200.

29

Aside from the thick creed to be used by citizens, adapting the ideas of the

Noahide system would call for developing a thinner version of that creed as well.

Outsiders would be expected to commit to that thinner version, as the price of entry into a

society whose workings differ—greatly or minimally—from the workings of their home

society.

The point of demanding this of permanent residents is not to set up a barrier to

their entry into American society. Indeed, I see no reason why those who hope to

naturalize need to be made to wait a full five years from entry. To the extent that they

understand what America is and means, and can present reasonable evidence of the

sincerity of their attachment to this country, there is no reason that five years should be

the magic time period.69 The point of demanding this is so that we all, citizens and not,

understand what it means to be an American, and take seriously membership in that

society, whether as a citizen or as an LPR, in order, as our founding phrase goes, to form

a more perfect Union.

69 Those fleeing oppression, for example, can commit to America relatively soon after arrival; assuming

they have been absorbed into the society to a reasonable extent, they could be naturalized earlier.

30

ENDNOTES

i The issue of positive requirements for Noahides is fairly complex; we will raise some ideas about

that infra. Similarly too complex to discuss here is the question of how Jews expected non-Jews to learn of

these responsibilities, although I hope to address it elsewhere. J. David Bleich, CONTEMPORARY

HALAKHIC PROBLEMS II (New York: KTAV, 1983) and Michael Broyde, “The Obligation of Jews to

Seek Obervance of Noahide Laws by Gentiles: A Theoretical Review” TIKKUN OLAM: SOCIAL

RESPONSIBILITY IN JEWISH THOUGHT AND LAW eds. David Shatz, Chaim I. Waxman, and Nathan

J. Diament (Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, 1997), 103-144 have argued that Jewish law does not obligate

Jews to teach these laws to non-Jews, although some sources required giving information when requested.

Broyde, 123-4, discusses Maimonides’ statement, LAWS OF KINGS 8:10, which seems to require

coercing observance of the Noahide laws. I agree with the view that Maimonides only meant that within

the Land of Israel or any territories conquered by the Jewish nation, since Maimonides does not assume any

general obligation for Jews to wage war to convert non-Jews to the Noahide system, see LAWS OF KINGS

5;1. 8;10 should be read as saying that Jews are required to secure adherence to the Noahide laws from any

non-Jews who come under their control.

ii At least for Talmudic Jews and their successors. I hope to show elsewhere that Jews thought of pre-

Sinaitic Noahide law, meaning the Noahide law incumbent on non-Jews before the giving of the Law at

Sinai, as intuitive; with the codification of Jewish law at Sinai, Noahide law was changed as well.

iii Perhaps because it goes most directly to judgments about the justice of a particular society, these

laws have been discussed more than all the others, making brevity on this issue almost impossible to

achieve. One central question worth mentioning is the Talmud’s assumption that the seven Noahide

commandments include only prohibitions; how the commandment to set up courts or law qualifies as a

prohibition is unclear. Maimonides’ version, which says that all members of a non-Jewish society are

liable for any public violation of the Noahide laws that they do not try to stop, which seems to see it as a

prohibition against sitting silent when these laws are being breached. Nahmanides, however, sees dinin as

a commandment to set up a system of civil law; the capital punishment would accrue to those judges who

neglected to combat violations that they were supposed to judge.

iv Two sources in particular are cited as support for the natural law view. First, bERUVIN 100b notes

that in the absence of revelation, human beings could nonetheless have learned certain lessons from

animals—modesty from the cat, theft from the ant, incest from the dove, and sexual etiquette from the

rooster. Those who see the Noahides as natural law, of course, go a good deal farther than that. The

second source, bYOMA 67b, interprets the Bible’s distinction between laws and statutes. Laws, the

Talmud says, are those rules that should have been written even had they not been. The Talmud then gives

five examples, all of them Noahide laws, suggesting that the Talmud saw these as intuitive rules necessary

even in the absence of revelation. Here, natural law claimants need to explain the missing other two, as

well as the details of the law we will mention below.

31

v There is debate about the text of that comment; many versions have Maimonides denying that such a

person is even wise, but that is not our issue. For one discussion, see Jacob I. Dienstag, Natural Law in

Maimonidean Thought and Scholarship 6 JEWISH LAW ANNUAL (1987), 64-77.

viSome support for Fox’ position actually comes from a medieval thinker ordinarily mentioned as

among those who accepts the existence of a natural law. The proponents of natural law as a Jewish idea

point to several medieval thinkers who speak of laws that are open to human reason, from Saadya Gaon in

the tenth century to Joseph Albo in the fifteenth. Albo, the first to use the actual Hebrew term for natural

law, dat tiv`it, posits three categories of law. He says, Book of Principles, I;7, that laws are either natural,

by which he means they are applicable to all people everywhere, conventional, meaning that they vary to

accommodate the different social, physical, economic, and political conditions among societies, or

religious, commanded by God through a prophet.

In a different discussion, I;25, Albo considers whether religious law would have to be universal as well.

Were religious law legislated from God’s perspective, it would have to be, since God is one and the same

throughout the world. The variations among peoples and societies, however, leave room for more than one

divine law. Those laws could not differ on fundamental matters, but they could take into account the

different audiences to whom they were being addressed. As an example, Albo points to the differences

between Noahide law and Sinaitic; although both are religious laws, they address different groups of people

and therefore differ in their particulars.

The comparison shows that Albo considered Noahide law a religious rather than natural law. He also

recognized the possibility that laws that are universal might still not be natural; they might be those

subsections of God’s law that God chose to apply universally. Albo thus does not identify natural law with

the Noahide law; since the Noahide law is also universal, it tends to render the concept of natural law fairly

insignificant in Jewish thought.

vii Even if we assume that these rules are general and intuitive in their basic form but particularist in

their details, we will have achieved the position taken in the text: while Jews might have seen themselves as

universalistic in their prescriptions for non-Jews, they necessarily incorporated their own worldview in

those rules, so that non-Jews would have to learn and understand important Jewish ideas to be able to thrive

in a Jewish commonwealth. See Maimonides, LAWS OF KINGS 10;1, who stresses their obligation to

learn Noahide laws, and his assuming that a Noahide who violated one of those laws even out of ignorance

would be nonetheless capitally liable.

viii As has been argued by Suzanne Last Stone, Sinaitic and Noahide Law: Legal Pluralism in Jewish Law, 12

CARDOZO L. REV. (1991) 1159 and passim. She contrasted Noahide law, a system that develops a moral political

life with Sinaitic law, which seeks to develop a covenantal community with God. In her more recent The Jewish

Tradition and Civil Society, ALTERNATIVE CONCEPTIONS OF CIVIL SOCIETY eds. S. Chambers and W.

Kymlicka (Princeton: Princeton U. Press, 2002), p. 154, she characterizes the Noahide laws as “the moral order

32

given by God to humanity…consisting of seven basic human obligations…and to establish a system of justice. The

nations of the world thus also potentially constitute societies of moral significance whose basic purpose is to

establish justice in the social sphere…” We can easily imagine, however, working polities that do not treat theft or

even murder as a capital crime, let alone incest. The other laws as well, as we will show infra, do not only combine

to develop a moral society, but one that develops at least a minimal relationship with God.

ix This view of corporate responsibility for immorality in one’s midst goes much further than current

theories. Maimonides’ ruling also seems to assume that the people of Shechem would not have been taking

their lives into their hands by protesting their prince’s actions, since he and most authorities do not envision

a Noahide requirement to be killed rather than transgress one of their laws, see J. David Bleich, Jewish Law

Annual vol. VII, 1988, 13, n. 22.

x Nahmanides assumes that violating any of the laws promulgated would also be liable for the death

penalty. If so, however, it is unclear why gezel, theft, was singled out as one of the Noahide laws. This

might suggest that at least these laws—the ones included in the general rubric of dinin—were open to

lighter punishments as well. See the next note for a discussion of the possibility that capital punishment is

not obligatory.

xi The strictness of Noahide law, both in terms of punishment and evidentiary requirements, is another

nonintuitive aspect of dinin. Each of these crimes (including theft of a minimal amount of money) incurs

the death penalty. Several scholars, traditional and academic, have argued that capital punishment for these

crimes was not required, just permitted. R. Aaron Soloveitchik, In the Matter of the Noahides (Hebrew) 19

BEIT YITSHAK (5747/1987), 336, makes that claim; he further labels as cruel any society that punishes

offenders more harshly than necessary. Similarly, Arnold Enker, Aspects of Interaction Between the Torah

Law, the King’s Law, and the Noahide Law in Jewish Criminal Law” 12 CARDOZO L. REV. 3-4 (Feb.-

March, 1991), 1153, argues that the term used for Noahide culpability translates as “ is killed,” as opposed

to “is liable for death,” which specifically means should be given the death penalty. In a slightly different

expression of the same fundamental idea, R. Joab Joshua Weingarten (1847-1922) RESPONSA HELKAT

YOAV Appendix 14, suggested that if non-Jews made their own laws on interpersonal issues—although he

cites theft and burglary as examples, when they are in the original seven Noahide laws—they would be

allowed to institute a lower level of punishment, since their established law becomes a kind of communal

foregoing of their right to kill offenders.

I find the arguments unconvincing, for several reasons. First, J. David Bleich, CONTEMPORARY

HALAKHIC PROBLEMS II (New York: KTAV, 1983), p. 345 points out that Maimonides clearly

required the killing of offenders, as otherwise he could not have justified the brothers’ eradication of the

town of Shechem. Unless the townspeople were capitally liable for their failure to execute their prince,

Shechem, for abducting Dinah, the brothers’ conduct is unjustifiable. Second, the argument would

presumably apply to all the Noahide laws, but there is no good reason, from a Jewish perspective, to punish

murder, idolatry, or incest with anything less than death.

33

R. Weingarten’s argument regarding burglary or, even better, fraud, is more plausible. Perhaps those

laws that are legislated as part of the obligation of dinin according to Nahmanides could be open to

communal agreement to set a lower level of punishment. The capital crime would be the failure to set up a

legal system at all, with pieces of the system punished to different extents. In terms of the other

prohibitions—including direct stealing—I do not see what gives the community the power to neglect giving

the punishment the Talmud assumes.

Evidence requirements are also not intuitive, as the law allows (or requires) killing a non-Jew even on

the basis of one reliable witness’ testimony, even before one judge, see bSANHEDRIN 57b. Maimonides

seems to assume no need for a formal court proceeding, as he accepts Simeon and Levi’s killing of

Shechem as execution of judgment, but TOSAFOT AVODAH ZARA 64b, s.v. Eizehu ger does.

xii The law of bailments is a perfect example. Such laws may be purely functional, avoiding

disagreements about the parties’ various responsibilities, but they go well beyond a minimal standard of

what a society needs in order to function. When Nahmanides, Isserles, and others assume that non-Jews

were required to set up a more extensive system of civil law, that inherently forced those societies to

confront questions of the kinds of bonds they expected among their citizens. This in turn would forge a

sense of group identity as opposed to seeing themselves as a group of individuals who happen to live in

close proximity to each other.

xiii Even Maimonides, who thought that the existence of a single God was a logically demonstrable

proposition, recognized the difficulty in intuiting it on one’s own. In his view, LAWS OF IDOL

WORSHIP 1;3, Abraham spent thirty-seven years struggling with the issue before deciding that there was

only one God.

xiv It is in that sense that Maimonides speaks of the rationality of Biblical law in the end of the Guide

as well; he means that he can supply reasons that a rational person can appreciate, but not necessarily intuit

or feel compelled to follow once the reasons are presented.

xv The concern of Noahide incest laws with maternal lineage—so that intercourse with a maternal

half-sister is prohibited, but not with a paternal one— is largely unexplained in the Talmud. Since Noahide

law did recognize paternal lineage in other areas, most notably inheritance, see bKIDDUSHIN 17b,

Maimonides, LAWS OF INHERITANCE 6;9, SHULHAN ARUKH HOSHEN MISHPAT 283; 1, we need

to explain why maternal lineage became the focus here. I believe that the greater physical connection to a

sister through the mother explains the incest prohibition. A sexuality that insisted that people move away

from their original family in finding partners might reasonably prohibit all siblings that came physically out

of the same body, while ignoring the genetic bond that extends from the father. Note that other medieval

authorities defined the incest prohibitions for non-Jews differently. For one example, see R. Meir

Abulafia’s YAD RAMAH, SANHEDRIN 57b-58b.

xvi See LAWS OF KINGS 9;9, based on bAVODAH ZARAH 72a. Note that Maimonides includes all

forms of theft in this category, including withholding wages.

34

xvii This is the implication of bSANHEDRIN 58b, which derives the prohibition from GENESIS

8;22’s reference to never ceasing productivity, “day or night.” Like with the study of Torah discussed in

footnote , this prohibition is not as restrictive as it sounds. Hatam Sofer (R. Moses Sofer, 1762-1839), in

his novellae on the tractate, noted that vacations and leisure activities are also part of productivity when

they are for the purpose of rejuvenating oneself, as, presumably, are charitable, volunteer, and family

activities.

xviii 92b. Note that the version of this statement found in JERUSALEM TALMUD, AVODAH

ZARAH 2;1 says that they will accept these thirty in the future. In addition, there is no consensus about

what those thirty are; R. Samuel b. Hofni Gaon had one list in his Biblical commentary, GENESIS 34:12,

published by A. Greenbaum (Jerusalem: Mossad haRav Kook), 52-58. R. Menahem Azariah of Fano, TEN

ARTICLES, ARTICLE ON INVESTIGATING THE LAW III;21, has a different list. Both those lists

simply collate the various versions of the seven Noahide laws found in the Talmud, and add several other

commandments, such as childbearing and giving charity.

xix The three laws non-Jews did keep were not writing marriage contracts for men, not selling human

flesh in public, and honoring Torah. The first two are ways of mitigating apparently widespread violations

of some of the Noahide laws themselves. The question of marriage and marriage contracts among men

only arises when a society has already foregone a prohibition on homosexuality itself, and is testing how

far that permissiveness will go. So, too, restricting the marketing of human flesh indicates a society that

has long trampled the boundary restricting the eating of flesh to that of dead animals.

These two examples show that the “laws” that the Talmud envisioned the Noahides accepting were

ways to salvage some of the original commandments, whose actual fulfillment was a lost cause. In this

context, the reference to their respecting Torah might be construed the same way—while they did not

actually observe the rules the Torah set up for them, they still respected the document, a remnant of the

original ideal that the Torah had expected of them. The Talmud’s assertion that even there, in the attempt

to retain something of Noahide law, the non-Jews only succeeded at keeping up with three of the thirty,

gives some sense of the Talmud’s attitude towards the non-Jews of their time.

xx The comment appears as an explanation of ZECHARIAH 11;13’s reference to thirty pieces of

silver. It would be possible, then, to dismiss this as part of a midrashic attempt to reconcile various parts of

Scripture; this was apparently the view of most medieval commentators, who did not refer to the statement

at all.

xxi We should note that many authorities, starting with R. Nissim of Kairouan in the tenth century,

asserted that non-Jews were obligated in any logical commandment; he gives the example of honoring

one’s mother and father. A full discussion of that issue is beyond our focus here. In addition, with modern

society’s realization of the limitations of appeals to intuition, the value of this category has become

severely limited, as indeed our analysis itself suggests.

xxii Maimonides, LAWS OF CIRCUMCISION 3;7 and Responsum 148. Maimonides is citing a

source that I have not been able to identify, but his comment, 3;8, that the foreskin is disgusting, and his

35

assumption, GUIDE III;49, that circumcision serves to reduce sexual desire, make circumcision an almost

intuitive practice for those who wish to maintain a healthy control over their sexuality. In that context, it

makes sense to leave this option open to non-Jews as well.

xxiii R. Yosef Caro, in his glosses to LAWS OF CIRCUMCISION 3;7, assumed that Maimonides only

allowed circumcision for the sake of conversion; Radbaz, (R. David ibn Abu Zimra, 1479-1573, Spain,

Israel, and Egypt), writing about LAWS OF KINGS 10;10, assumes that non-Jews are excluded from

commandments that require holiness and purity, such as wearing phylacteries (tefillin); R. Moses Feinstein

(1895-1986), RESPONSA IGGEROT MOSHE YOREH DEAH 2;7 assumes that non-Jews can only keep

those commandments relating to donations to the Temple, giving charity, and so on, but nothing that is

particular to the Jews. On the other hand, in addition to Maimonides, R. Abraham Gumbiner (1637-83),

MAGEN AVRAHAM 304;12 and BEUR HALAKHAH (R. Israel Meir Kagan, 1839-1933) ad loc.

assumed that a non-Jew could accept various commandments in the course of becoming a ger toshav and,

in so doing, render them obligatory upon himself for the rest of his life.

xxiv I am aware of those, such as Peter J. Spiro, supra note , who point out that we expect naturalizing

citizens to know more than birth citizens, but see that as a flaw in our educational systems rather than our

conception of citizenship. From my perspective, it would be perfectly reasonable to expect birth-citizens to

avow, at the age of 18, their allegiance to those principles and to punish those who refuse to do so.

________

Do not be deceived it is yet another shem sham of empty Treasonous Eloquence of the GOPDEMED Blasphemers of HELL !

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070605/D8PISBM00.html

Immigration Deal Under Threat in Senate


Jun 5, 4:20 PM (ET)

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS

 
(AP) Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. speaks during a news conference on immigration reform, Tuesday, June...
Full Image
 


WASHINGTON (AP) - A broad bipartisan immigration deal was threatened Tuesday as the Senate prepared to vote on a Republican proposal to make it harder for millions of illegal immigrants to qualify for green cards.

The proposal by Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo., would eliminate extra points that illegal immigrants could get toward lawful status for work done while they were in the U.S. illegally, owning a home, or having health insurance. The proposed merit-based system would award the most credit for employment criteria such as education and skill level.

The Senate also planned to consider a bipartisan bid to require employers to recruit U.S. workers before giving a foreign laborer a job under the measure's controversial new temporary worker program.

Showdowns were expected on Democratic efforts to allow more family-based immigration under the bill and more Republican proposals to make the path to legalization for illegal immigrants more burdensome.

 
(AP) Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., left, and Janet Murguia from the National Council of La Raza, take...
Full Image
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., an architect of the bill, said he would oppose the family changes despite his sympathy for the efforts.

"I'm going to stay with the agreement," Kennedy said of the so-called "grand bargain" he struck with conservative Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., and other Republicans and Democrats from across the political spectrum.

That leaves in doubt the fate of a proposal by Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., to allow more than 800,000 people who had applied for permanent legal status by the beginning of the year to get green cards based purely on their family connections - a preference the bill ends for most relatives who got in line after May 2005.

A close vote was also expected on a bid by Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, to bar illegal immigrants who have defied deportation orders from gaining legal status. That could cut down substantially on the number of unlawful immigrants who would be able to take advantage of the measure's path to legalization.

The bill, a top domestic priority for President Bush that poses a perplexing political dilemma for Republicans and Democrats, is widely regarded as the best chance for Congress to take action on immigration - possibly for years to come.

"There are a number of threats and opportunities before us," said Frank Sharry of the National Immigration Forum, part of a coalition of liberal groups pushing hard for passage despite some grave concerns with the measure.

Kennedy said lawmakers who listened to their constituents over a Memorial Day break last week heard that, "the American people want action on immigration reform."

"We know that we are facing some challenges," Kennedy said, referring to a host of amendments that could scuttle the deal.

"Those of us, the dozen or so, who have put this bill together are finding it very, very hot to handle," said Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa.

Specter said he'd like to support some of the changes being put forth this week, "but if we're to keep this bill intact to the extent of being able to pass it, there are going to be a lot of very tough votes."

In addition to Menendez's proposal, several Democratic presidential hopefuls have proposed family-related changes.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., is proposing allowing more spouses and minor children of legal permanent residents to immigrate to the U.S., by exempting them from visa caps.

The Senate also is considering a bid by Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., to more than double, to 90,000 a year, the number of green cards available for parents of U.S. citizens.

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., plans an attempt to phase out the point system that gives little credit for family ties to a U.S. citizen or permanent legal resident.

 

so there you have their Noahide scheme of HELL Maraka the apostate

Do you really think their Talmudic Masters care what you think?

Senate Amnesty Will
Strain Welfare System

Center For Immigration Studies
6-6-7
 
WASHINGTON -- As they debate legalization for illegal immigrants, Senators would do well to keep in mind the most recent data on welfare use by the people in question. According to the Department of Homeland Security, nearly 60% of illegal aliens are from Mexico and 80% of the total are from Latin America as a whole. A new Center for Immigration Studies analysis of 2006 Census Bureau data, which includes legal and illegal immigrants, shows use of welfare by households headed by Mexican and Latin American immigrants is more than double that of native households. Among the findings:
 
* 51% of all Mexican immigrant households use at least one major welfare program and 28% use more than one program.
­ 40% use food assistance, 35% use Medicaid, 6% use cash assistance.
 
* 45% of all Latin American immigrant households use at least one welfare program and 24% use more than one program.
­ 32% use food assistance, 31% use Medicaid, 6% use cash assistance.
 
* 20% of native households use at least one welfare program and 11% multiple programs.
­ 11% use food assistance, 15% use Medicaid, 5% use cash assistance.
 
See full details, plus a table and data broken out for the following states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, and Texas, at:
 
http://www.cis.org/articles/2007/welfarerelease.html
 
For more information, contact Steven Camarota, Director of Research at the Center for Immigration Studies, at 202-466-8185 or
sac@cis.org.
 
Center for Immigration Studies
1522 K St. NW, Suite 820
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 466-8185 fax: (202) 466-8076
center@cis.org
www.cis.org

______

Jesus didnt say "no" to noahide, HE WAS THE AUTHOR OF IT

COULD IT BE SAMLIQUIDATION IS IN FACT WORKING FOR JEWRY AS A PLANT?...........if so, it WILL be found out and BY ME and you keep your eyes open because you will read it all exposed in the open HERE!. He has already been exposed of having close associations with so called "ex chabadists" and THAT ladies and gentlemen is how enemy dispropaganda is PROPAGANDIZED.

http://www.thelowestroom.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=655

Pickles "right hand", his god is THE BEAST. Its the SON OF MAN, JESUS "THE KIKE" who has kicked God the father of the throne and sits on it yonder in heaven........THE ABOMINATION THAT MAKETH DESOLATE!) Jason Guenther 34th sideline, Pickering Ontario Canada

 www.thelowestroom.com

________

Noahide News Part 756

 

 

Jesus who is and forever the ONLY Everlasting Righteousness


4: For Christ is the
end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.
5: For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them.
6: But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:)

Hasidim and their Moshiach, that son of Perdition


7: Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.)
8: But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
9: That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Not maybe


10: For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11: For the scripture saith, 

Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.


12: For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
13: For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
14: How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? 

and how shall they hear without a preacher?


15: And how shall they preach, except they be sent? 

not ordained by a state sanctioned 501 C3 institution of Satan's religion, BUT SENT BY THE FATHER

as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
16: But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?
17: So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
18: But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.
19: But I say, 

Did not Israel know? 

First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you.
20: But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me.
21: But to Israel he saith, 

All day long I have stretched forth my hands 

unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.

Romans 10:9

9: That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.


10: For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

 


11: For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
12: For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

 

http://www.iamishisname.com/

The Last Deception

Section 2

  section 3   

section 4 

  section 5  

section 6  

section 7 

  section 8 

section  9     

section 10  

section 11  

section 12  

section 13 

section 14 "The Protocols of the Illuminated Elders of Tzion"

  section 15 

      section 16 "The Beast Has Risen" 

 section 16-B

 section 17  

  section 17-B  

  section 17-C   

section 17-D

  section 18    

section 18-B

section 19    

section 19-B

section 20  

 section 20-B 

  section 20-C 

  section 20-D 

  section 20-E

section 21 

  section 22  

section 23

section 24

section 25

Daniel's Seventy Weeks

Was Peter a Jew?

The Two Witnesses

"The Whore of Babylon"

Mystery Babylon

 Are the " Ael-ians coming"

Ael-ians II

Wall Street " The Mark" is Here

Wall Street II

Wall Street III

It has happened "War Declared upon and in America"

Declared section Part II

"Questions"

"All you ever need to know about their god and Qabalah"

Qabalah Part II

Qabalah Part III

National Identification Card

 ADDED Material 3-25-2004 Prophecy Unfolding

A Sincere Request to  "Rapture" Teachers

"Seventh Trumpet"

Compulsory Constitutional Cremation

Homeland Security, "The Police State"

"The Fourth Beast"

The Babylonian Talmudic Mystical Qabalah

The Scribes of Baal

How will they do it- " The false-christ"

False Christ Part II

The Word

Baal's food Tax

"The Changing of the Guards"

"Summation" The beginning of sorrows has begun

"Moshiach ben Lucifer"

Satan's Tales "Wagging the Global Dog"

"Satan's Plan", Protocols of Zion ( of course they will dispute it's authenticity)

I Witch, New One World Order Seal

Satan's Enforcers of Quaballah

Satan's Enforcers Part 2

Satan's Enforcers Part 3

Satan's Enforcers Part 4

The Seed of God or the Seed of Satan, Your choice by faith

Pledge of Allegiance Part Two

I AM, the Revelation of Jesus Christ

King of the Noachides

"Beware the Mark"

"Beware the Mark" part two

"Beware the Mark" Part 3

"Beware the Mark" Part Four

"Beware the Mark" Part Five

 Harvest of Fear

"Harvest of Fear" Part Two

"Harvest of Fear" Part Three

National Organization Against Hasidic International Talmudic Enforcement

Where's Da Plane Boss, wheres da plane?

The Tarot Card Killer of Olam Ha Ba

The "Lessor Jew"

Temporary Coup d' Etat

The Federal Reserve, Fed up with the Fed?

The Protocols Today. Dispute this, Liars !

Protocols Today Part Two

Letter to a friend "It's not the Jews Dummy"

Identity of the Illuminati

The "Son's of the Synagogue of Satan"Chabad Lubavitch

Chabad Satan Part 1A

Chabad Satan Part 2

Chabad Satan Part 2A

Chabad Satan Part 2B

Chabad Satan Part 3

Chabad Satan Part 3A

Chabad Satan Part 4

Chabad Satan Part 4A

Chabad Satan Part 4B

Chabad Satan Part 4C

Chabad Satan Part 5

Chabad satan Part 5A

Chabad Satan Part 5B

Chabad Satan Part 5C

Chabad Satan Part 6

Chabad Satan Part 6B

Chabad Satan Part 6C

Chabad Satan Part 6D

Chabad Satan Part 7

Chabad Satan Part 7A

Chabad Satan Part 7B

Chabad Satan Part 7C

Chabad Satan Part 8

Chabad Satan Part 8A

Chabad Satan Part 8B

Chabad Satan Part 8C

Chabad Satan Part 8D

Chabad Satan Part 9

Chabad Satan Part 9A

Chabad Satan Part 9B

Chabad Satan Part 9C

Chabad Satan Part 9D

Chabad Satan Part 10

Chabad Satan Part 10A

Chabad Satan Part 10B

Chabad Satan Part 10C

Chabad Satan Part 10D

Chabad Satan Part 11

The Chabad Satan Wall of Destruction

Chabad Wall Part 2

Chabad Wall Part 3

Chabad Wall Part 4

The Chabad Phoenix is Rising

Columbia "The Queen of Heaven"

Patriot Akt II, Comrad 

The Infiltration of the leaven "Jerusalem Council"

Satan's One World Religion

OWR Part 2

OWR Part 3

OWR Part 4

One World Religion Part 5

One World Religion Part 6

One World Religion Part 7 Religion Part 7

Re the god of Talmud Bavli

Perpetual Purim

"The Raiser of Taxes"

Jewish Persecution

Obedient Ishmael Kislev 19, 5764

The Final Nazi

Nazi Part 2

Nazi Part 3

Nazi Part 4

The Lord of the Ring, the Return of the Talmudic king

Changing the Time and the Laws

The Leaven of the Chabad Lubavitch Chassidim Pharisees

Exod-U.S the coming Geula 

anti-semitism?

Who murdered Jesus the Christ

"Replacement Theology" of Judaic Talmudism

Eating Rainbow Stew with a Silver Spoon, underneath a Noahide Sky

the gods

"The Two Whores"

Noahide News

Noahide News 2

Noahide News Part 3

Noahide News Part 4

Noahide News Part 5

Noahide News Part 6

Noahide News Part 7

Noahide News Part 8

Noahide News Part 9

Noahide News Part 10

Noahide News Part 11

Noahide News Part 12

Noahide News Part 13

Noahide News Part 14

Noahide News Part 15

Noahide News Part 16

Noahide News Part 17

Noahide News Part 18

Noahide News Part 19

Noahide News Part 20

Noahide News Part 21

Noahide News part 22

Noahide News Part 23

Noahide News part 24

Noahide News Part 25

Noahide News Part 26

Noahide News part 27

Noahide News Part 28

Noahide News Part 29

Noahide News Part 30

Noahide News Part 31

Noahide News Part 32

Noahide News Part 33

Noahide News Part 34

Noahide News Part 35

Noahide News Part 36

Noahide News Part 37

Noahide News Part 38

Noahide News Part 39

Noahide News Part 40

Noahide News Part 41

Noahide News Part 42

Noahide News Part 43

Noahide News Part 44

Noahide News Part 45

Noahide News Part 46

Noahide News Part 47

Noahide News Part 48

Noahide News Part 49

Noahide News Part 50

Noahide News Part 51

Noahide News Part 52

Noahide News Part 53

Noahide News Part 54

Noahide News Part 55

Noahide NewsPart 56

Noahide News Part 57

Noahide News Part 58

Noahide News Part 59

Noahide News Part 60

Noahide News Part 61

Noahide News Part 62

Noahide News Part 63

Noahide News Part 64 

Noahide News Part 65

Noahide News Part 66

Noahide News Part 67

Noahide News Part 68

Noahide News Part 69

Letter to Bob Jones and President Bush and all televangelist

Noahide News Part 70

Noahide News Part 71

Noahide News Part 72

Noahide News Part 73

Noahide News Part 74

Noahide News Part 75

Noahide News Part 76

Noahide News Part 77

Noahide News Part 78

Noahide News Part 79

Noahide News Part 80

Noahide News Part 81

Noahide News Part 82

Noahide News Part 83 ALERT ALERT ALERT

Noahide News Part 84

Noahide News Part 85

Noahide News Part 86

Noahide News Part 87

Noahide News Part 88

Noahide News Part 89

Noahide News part 90

Noahide News Part 91

Noahide News Part 92

Noahide News Part 93

Noahide News Part 94

Noahide News Part 95

Noahide News Part 96

Noahide News Part 97

Noahide News Part 98

Noahide News Part 99

Noahide News Part 100

Noahide News Part 101

Noahide News Part 102

Noahide News Part 103

Noahide News Part 104

Noahide News Part 105

Noahide News Part 106

Noahide News Part 107

Noahide News Part 108

Noahide News Part 109

Noahide News Part 110

Noahide News Part 111

Noahide News Part 112

Noahide News Part 113

Noahide News Part 114

Noahide Naws Part 115

Noahide News Part 116

Noahide News Part 117

Noahide News Part 118

Noahide News Part 119

Noahide News Part 120

Noahide News Part 121

Noahide News Part 122

Noahide News Part 123

Noahide News Part 124

Noahide News part 125

Noahide News Part 126

Noahide News Part 127

Noahide News Part 128

Noahide News Part 129

The Revelation of Jesus the Christ the LORD God and His Father

Noahide News Part 130

Noahide news Part 131

Noahide News Part 132

Noahide News Part 133

Noahide News Part 134

Noahide News Part 135

Noahide news Part 136

Noahide News Part 137

Noahide News Part 138

Noahide News Part 139

Noahide News Part 140

Noahide News Part 141

Noahide News Part 142

Noahide News Part 143 THE JEWISH RELIGION Its InfluenceToday

Noahide News Part 144

Noahide News Part 145

Noahide News Part 146

Noahide news Part 147

Noahide News Part 148

Noahide News Part 149

Noahide News Part 150

Noahide News Part 151

Noahide News Part 152

Noahide News Part 153

Noahide News Part 154

NoahideNews Part 155

Noahide News Part 156

Noahide News Part 157

Noahide News Part 158

Noahide News Part 159

Noahide News Part 160

Noahide News Part 161

Noahide News Part 162

Noahide News Part 163

Noahide News Part 164

Noahide News Part 165

Noahide News part 166

Noahide News Part 167

Noahide News Part 168

Alert ! Noahide News Part 169 Alert ! Alert ! false Elijah cometh?

Noahide News Part 170

Noahide News Part 171

Noahide News Part 172

Noahide News Part 173

Noahide News Part 174 

Noahide News Part 175

Noahide News Part 176

Noahide News Part 177

Noahide News Part 178

Noahide News Part 179

Noahide News Part 180

Noahide News Part 181

Noahide News Part 182

Noahide News Part 183

Noahide News Part 184

Noahide News Part 185

Noahide News part 186

Noahide News Part 187

Noahide News Part 188

Noahide News Part 189

Noahide News Part 190 Alert ! Alert! Alert!

Noahide News part 191

Noahide News part 192

Noahide News Part 193

Noahide News Part 194

Noahide News Part 195

Noahide News Part 196

Noahide News Part 197 Alert Alert Alert !

Noahide News part 198

Noahide News Part 199

Noahide News Part 200

Noahide News Part 201

Noahide News Part 202

Noahide News Part 203Alert Alert Alert !

Noahide News Part 204 Alert ! Alert ! Alert!

Noahide News Part 205

Noahide news Part 206

Noahide News Part 207

Noahide News Part 208

Noahide News Part 209

Noahide News Part 210

Noahide News Part 211

Noahide News Part 212

Noahide News Part 213

Noahide News Part 214

Noahide News Part 215

Noahide News Part 216

Noahide News Part 217

Noahide News Part 218

Noahide News Part 219

Noahide News Part 220 Alert ! Alert!

Noahide News Part 221

Noahide News Part 222 Alert ! Alert!

Noahide News Part 223

Noahide News Part 224 Alert! Alert!

Noahide News part 225

Noahide News Part 226

Noahide News Part 227

Noahide News Part 228 Alert! Alert! Alert!

Noahide News Part 229

Noahide News Part 230 Alert ! Alert!

Noahide News Part 231

Noahide News Part 232

Noahide News Part 233

Noahide News Part 234

Noahide News part 235

Noahide News Part 236

Noahide News part 237

Noahide News Part 238

Noahide News Part 239

Noahide News Part 240

Noahide News Part 241 Alert ! Alert ! Alert!

Noahide News Part 242

Noahide News Part 243

Noahide News Part 244

Noahide News Part 245

Noahide News Part 246

Noahide News Part 247

Noahide News Part 248

Noahide News Part 249

"Left Behind"

Noahide News Part 250

Noahide News Part 251

Noahide News Part 252

Noahide News Part 253

Noahide News Part 254

Noahide News Part 255

Noahide News Part 256

Noahide News part 257

Noahide News Part 258

Noahide News Part 259

Noahide News Part 260

Noahide News Part 261

Noahide News Part 262

Noahide News Part 263

Noahide News Part 264

Noahide News Part 265

Noahide News Part 266

Noahide News Part 267

Noahide News Part 268

Noahide News Part 269

Noahide News Part 270

Noahide News Part 271

Noahide News Part 272

Noahide News Part 273

Noahide News Part 274

Noahide News Part 275

Noahide News Part 276

Noahide News Part 277

Noahide News Part 278

Noahide News Part 279

Noahide News Part 280

Noahide News Part 281

Noahide News Part 282

Noahide News Part 283

Noahide News Part 284

Noahide News Part 285

Saints of the Living God

Noahide News Part 286

Noahhide News Part 287

Noahide News Part 288

Noahide News Part 289 Terminated page

Noahide News Part 290

Noahide News Part 291

Noahide News Part 292

Noahide News Part 293

Noahide News Part 294

Noahide News Part 295 Alert ! Alert!

Noahide News Part 296

Noahide News Part 297

Noahide News Part 298

Noahide News Part 299

Noahide News Part 300

Noahide News Part 301

Noahide News Part 302

Noahide News Part 303  

Noahide News Part 304

Noahide News Part 305

Noahide News Part 306

Noahide News Part 307

Noahide News Part 308

Noahide News Part 309

Noahide News Part 310

Noahide News Part 311

Noahide News Part 312

The Revelation of Jesus the Christ the LORD God and His Father

Noahide News part 313

Noahide News Part 314

Noahide News part 315

Noahide News Part 316

Noahide News Part 317

Noahide News Part 318

Noahide News Part 319

Noahide News Part 320

Noahide News Part 321 Sanhedrin Alert !

Noahide News Part 322

Noahide News Part 323

Noahide News Part 324

Noahide News Part 325

Noahide News Part 326

Noahide News Part 327

Noahide News Part 328

Noahide News Part 329

Noahide News Part 330

Noahide News Part 331

Noahide News Part 332

Noahide News Part 333

Noahide News Part 334

Noahide News Part 335

Noahide News Pat 336

Noahide News Part 337

Noahide News Part 338

Noahide News Part 339

Noahide News Part 340

Noahide News Part 341

Noahide News Part 342

Noahide News Part 343

Noahide News Part 344

Noahide News Part 345

Noahide News Part 346

Noahide News Part 347

Noahide News Part 348

Noahide News Part 349

Noahide News Part 350

Noahide News Part 351

Jesus said No to Noahide

Noahide News Part 352

Noahide News Part 353

Noahide News Part 354

Noahide News Part 355

Noahide News Part 356

Noahide News Part 357

Noahide News Part 358

Noahide News Part 359

Noahide News Part 360

Noahide News Part 361

Noahide News Part 362

Noahide News Part 363

Noahide News Part 364

Noahide News Part 365

Noahide News Part 366

Noahide News Part 367

Noahide News Part 368

Noahide News Part 369

Noahide News Part 370

Noahide News Part 371

Noahide News Part 372

Noahide News Part 373

Noahide News Part 374

Noahide News Part 375

Noahide News Part 376

Noahide News Part 377

Noahide News Part 378

Noahide News Part 379

Noahide News Part 380

Noahide News Part 381

Noahide News Part 382

Noahide News Part 383

Noahide News Part 384

Noahide News Part 385

Noahide News Part 386

Noahide News Part 387

Noahide News Part 388

Noahide News Part 389

Noahide News Part 390

Noahide News Part 391

Noahide News Part 392

Noahide News Part 393

Noahide News Part 394

Noahide News Part 395

Noahide News Part 396

Noahide News Part 397

Noahide News Part 398

Noahide News Part 399

Noahide News Part 400

Noahide News Part 401

Noahide News Part 402

Noahide News Part 403

Noahide News Part 404

Noahide News Part 405

Noahide News Part 406

Noahide News Part 407

Noahide News Part 408

Noahide News Part 409

Noahide News Part 410

Noahide News Part 411

Noahide News Part 412

Noahide News Part 413

Noahide News Part 414

Noahide News Part 415

Noahide News Part 416

Noahide News Part 417

Noahide News Part 418

Noahide News Part 419

Noahide News Part 420

Noahide News Part 421

Noahide News Part 422

Noahide News Part 423

Noahide News Part 424

Noahide News Part 425

Noahide News Part 426

Noahide News Part 427

Noahide News Part 428

Noahide News Part 429

Noahide News Part 430

Noahide News Part 431

Noahide News Part 432

Noahide News Part 433

Noahide News Part 434

Noahide News Part 435

Noahide News Part 436

Noahide News Part 438

      Noahide News Part 439     

 Noahide News Part 440

Noahide News Part 441

Noahide News Part 442

Noahide News Part 443

Noahide News Part 444

Noahide News Part 445

Noahide News Part 446

Noahide News Part 447

Noahide News Part 448

Noahide News Part 449

Noahide News Part 450

Noahide News Part 451

 Noahide News Part 452

Noahide News Part 453

Noahide News Part 454

Noahide News Part 455

Noahide News Part 456

Noahide News Part 457

Noahide News Part 458

Noahide News Part 459

Noahide News Part 460

Noahide News Part 461

Noahide News Part 462

Noahide News Part 463

Noahide News Part 464

Noahide News Part 465

Noahide News Part 466

Noahide News Part 467

Noahide News Part 468

Noahide News Part 469

Noahide News Part 470

Noahide News Part 471

Noahide News Part 472

Noahide News Part 473

Noahide News Part 474

Noahide News Part 475

Noahide News Part 476

Noahide News Part 477

Noahide News Part 478

Noahide News Part 479

Noahide News Part 480

Noahide News Part 481

Noahide News Part 482

Noahide News Part 483

Noahide News Part 484

Noahide News Part 485

Noahide News Part 486

Noahide News Part 487

Noahide News Part 488

Noahide News Part 489

Noahide News Part 490

Noahide News Part 491

Noahide News Part 492

Noahide News Part 493

Noahide News Part 494

Noahide News Part 495

Noahide News Part 496

Noahide News Part 497

Noahide News Part 498

Noahide News Part 499

Noahide News Part 500

Noahide News Part 501

Noahide News Part 502

Noahide News Part 503

Noahide News Part 504

Noahide News Part 505

Noahide News Part 506

Noahide News Part 507

Noahide News Part 508

Noahide News Part 509

Noahide News Part 510

Noahide News Part 511

Noahide News Part 512

Noahide News Part 513

Noahide News Part 514

Noahide News Part 515

Noahide News Part 516

Noahide News Part 517

Noahide News Part 518

Noahide News Part 519

Noahide News Part 520

Noahide News Part 521

Noahide News Part 522

Noahide News Part 523

Noahide News Part 524

Noahide News Part 525

Noahide News Part 526

Noahide News Part 527

Noahide News Part 528

Noahide News Part 529

Noahide News Part 530

Noahide News Part 531

Noahide News Part 532

Noahide News Part 533

Noahide News Part 534

Noahide News Part 535

Noahide News Part 536

Noahide News Part 537

Noahide News Part 538

Noahide News Part 539

Noahide News Part 540

Noahide News Part 541

Noahide News Part 542

Noahide News Part 543

Noahide News Part 544

Noahide News Part 545

Noahide News Part 546

Noahide News Part 547

Noahide News Part 548

Noahide News Part 549

Noahide News Part 550

Noahide News Part 551

Noahide News Part 552

Noahide News Part 553

Noahide News Part 554

Noahide News Part 555

Noahide News Part 556

Noahide News Part 557

Noahide News Part 558

Noahide News Part 559

Noahide News Part 560

Noahide News Part 561

Noahide News Part 562

Noahide News Part 563

Noahide News Part 564

Noahide News Part 565

Noahide News Part 566

Noahide News Part 567

Noahide News Part 568

Noahide News Part 569

Noahide News Part 570

Noahide News Part 571

Noahide News Part 572

Noahide News Part 573

Noahide News Part 574

Noahide News Part 575

Noahide News Part 576

Noahide News Part 577

Noahide News Part 578

Noahide News Part 579

Noahide News Part 580

Noahide News Part 581

Noahide News Part 582

Noahide News Part 583

Noahide News Part 584

Noahide News Part 585

Noahide News Part 586

Noahide News Part 587

Noahide News Part 588

Noahide News Part 589

Noahide News Part 590

Noahide News Part 591

Noahide News Part 592

Noahide News Part 593

Noahide News Part 594

Noahide News Part 595

Noahide News Part 596

Noahide News Part 597

Noahide News Part 598

Noahide News Part 599

Noahide News Part 600

Noahide News part 601

Noahide News Part 602

Noahide News Part 603

Noahide News Part 604

Noahide News Part 605

Noahide News Part 606 RED Alert !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Noahide News Part 607

Noahide News Part 608

Noahide News Part 609

Noahide News Part 610

Noahide News Part 611

Noahide News Part 612

Noahide News Part 613

Noahide News Part 614

Noahide News Part 615

Noahide News Part 616

Noahide News part 617

Noahide News Part 618

Noahide News part 619

Noahide News Part 620

Noahide News Part 621

Noahide News Part 622

Noahide News Part 623

Noahide News Part 624

Noahide News Part 625

Noahide News Part 626

Noahide News Part 627

Noahide News Part 628

Noahide News Part 629

Noahide News Part 630

Noahide News Part 631

Noahide News Part 632

Noahide News Part 633

Noahide News Part 634

Noahide News Part 635

Noahide News Part 636

Noahide News Part 637

Noahide News Part 638

Noahide News Part 639

Noahide News Part 640

Noahide News Part 641

Noahide News Part 642

Noahide News Part 643

Noahide News Part 644

Noahide News Part 645

Noahide News Part 646

Noahide News Part 647

Noahide News Part 647 updated

Noahide News Part 648

Noahide News Part 649

Noahide News Part 650

Noahide News Part 651

Noahide News Part 652

Noahide News Part 653

Noahide News Part 654

Noahide News Part 655

Noahide News Part 656

Noahide News Part 657

Noahide News Part 658

Noahide News Part 659

Noahide News Part 660

Noahide News Part 661

Noahide News Part 662

Noahide News Part 663

Noahide News Part 664

Noahide News Part 665

Noahide News Part 666

Noahide News Part 667

Noahide News part 668

Noahide News Part 669

Noahide News Part 670

Noahide News Part 671

Noahide News Part 672

Noahide News Part 673

Noahide News Part 674

Noahide News Part 675

Noahide News Part 676

Noahide News Part 677

Noahide News Part 678

Noahide News Part 679

Noahide News Part 680

Noahide News Part 681

Noahide News Part 682

Noahide News Part 683

Noahide News Part 684

Noahide News Part 685

Noahide News Part 686

Noahide News Part 687

Noahide News Part 688

Noahide News Part 689

Noahide News Part 690

Noahide News Part 691

Noahide News Part 692

Noahide News Part 693

Noahide News Part 694

Noahide News Part 695

Noahide News Part 696

Noahide News Part 697

Noahide News Part 698

Noahide News Part 699

Noahide News Part 700

Noahide News Part 701

Noahide News Part 702

Noahide News Part 703

Noahide News Part 704

Noahide News Part 705

Noahide News Part 706

Noahide News Part 707

Noahide News Part 708

Noahide News Part 709

Noahide News Part 710

Noahide News Part 711

Noahide News Part 712

Noahide News Part 713

Noahide News Part 714

Noahide News Part 715

Noahide News part 716

Noahide News Part 717

Noahide News Part 718

Noahide News Part 719

Noahide News Part 720

Noahide News Part 721

Noahide News Part 722

Noahide News Part 723

Noahide News Part 724

Noahide News Part 725

Noahide News Part 726

Noahide News Part 727

Noahide News Part 728

Noahide News Part 729

Noahide News Part 730

Noahide News Part 731

Noahide News Part 732

Noahide News Part 733

Noahide News Part 734

Noahide News Part 735

Noahide News Part 736

Noahide News Part 737

Noahide News Part 738

Noahide News Part 739

Noahide News Part 740

Noahide News Part 741

Noahide News Part 742

Noahide News Part 743

NoahideNews Part 744

Noahide News Part 745

Noahide News Part 746

Noahide News Part 747

Noahide News Part 748

Noahide News Part 749

Noahide News Part 750

Noahidenews Part 751

Noahide News Part 752

Noahide News Part 753

Noahide News Part 754

Noahide News Part 755

Noahide News Part 756