• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Noahide laws - a dangerous deception

FollowingHim said:
As I said earlier @Mojo, as written, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the summary version of the laws - which is why they are so dangerous, they are easy to accept because they sound ok. The problem is the interpretation of them. As these laws originate in the Talmud and are promoted by Rabbis, they must be interpreted according to Talmud by rabbinical authorities. And in the interpretation, Christianity (not just including, but especially, torah-observent Christianity) is punishable by beheading
Click to expand...

Otherwise known as, 'the devil is in the details'.

FollowingHim said:
The problem with the US law is that it is not just one law from back in 1991, but is formally reaffirmed every year by every president, on "education day", a day established to formally memorialise and officially honour a particular Jewish teacher with some rather concerning views. Still somewhat informal - but set up in such a way that they become continually spoken into the philosophy and culture of US presidents and other lawmakers, so that your government itself eventually comes to accept these as being the underlying religious & moral principles behind your own constitution and see implementing them as a patriotic act. It's a very sneaky move of historical revisionism that is far more significant than it appears on the surface - just like the laws themselves.
Click to expand...

From my reading of the law, it was a 1 time proclamation, I don't think this is remembered every year; but I could be wrong. But even if so, you overestimate the impact of these things in our political/cultural/propoganda system. Such things are mere niceties with almost no impact on the culture or politics. This was a nod to lobbyists and donors and beyond them few knew it even happened. What such things are though, is a reflection, a sign-post, of what is going on, or who holds sway. That was '91. Now in '16 you couldn't get elected without bending the knee to AIPAC and our freedoms are being abridged to protect said ethnicity from any and all criticism. We went from token gestures to near aristocracy in under 30 years.
 
FollowingHim said:
As I said earlier @Mojo, as written, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the summary version of the laws - which is why they are so dangerous, they are easy to accept because they sound ok. The problem is the interpretation of them.


The problem with the US law is that it is not just one law from back in 1991, but is formally reaffirmed every year by every president, on "education day",
Click to expand...

I get what you are saying and agree as to why they are potentially dangerous, but the title of your post put the danger on the Noahide laws themselves...not the interpretation of them. That's my point. The laws themselves seem pretty innocuous (except #3).

I will have to check, but I believe the 1991 statement from Congress was not an official law. It would have to pass both houses and then be signed by the president. It was probably more on the order of a ceremonial proclamation by a few congressmen. It happens all the time. It gets some goofball's name on the Congressional record and earns the representative brownie points from his constituents.
 
Mojo said:
It was probably more on the order of a ceremonial proclamation by a few congressmen. It happens all the time.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that many things are inserted into the congressional record simply by request of a congresscritter. Just something that they can claim later, but it was never even stated from the floor.
And yes, happens all of the time.
 
rockfox said:
Otherwise known as, 'the devil is in the details'.



From my reading of the law, it was a 1 time proclamation, I don't think this is remembered every year; but I could be wrong. But even if so, you overestimate the impact of these things in our political/cultural/propoganda system. Such things are mere niceties with almost no impact on the culture or politics. This was a nod to lobbyists and donors and beyond them few knew it even happened. What such things are though, is a reflection, a sign-post, of what is going on, or who holds sway. That was '91. Now in '16 you couldn't get elected without bending the knee to AIPAC and our freedoms are being abridged to protect said ethnicity from any and all criticism. We went from token gestures to near aristocracy in under 30 years.
Click to expand...
Bingo! Super disturbing unless you just trust that nothing is going to change the plan and declared end.
I doubt many supporting that group realize how opposed to Christianity and Christian's some of those they support are either.
 
Annual signing of the resolution containing the Noahide laws. Signed this year on 16 April by President Trump, has been signed annually by all presidents.
Yes, this sounds weird and not what you'd expect for a resolution from back in 1991. It is weird. But that's what's actually happening. This isn't some minor thing slipped in by a copywriter, it's something that is annually reaffirmed at a presidential level.

Unconstitutional Education Day (Noahide Laws) Resolution Signed Again On 4/16/19
 
FollowingHim said:
Annual signing of the resolution containing the Noahide laws. Signed this year on 16 April by President Trump, has been signed annually by all presidents.
Yes, this sounds weird and not what you'd expect for a resolution from back in 1991. It is weird. But that's what's actually happening. This isn't some minor thing slipped in by a copywriter, it's something that is annually reaffirmed at a presidential level.
Click to expand...

Very odd.
 
I'm not saying it's not something to keep an eye on, and I am for sure not a proponent of Noahide law, but in the interest of accuracy, these signings are still not LAWS.

Once again, it seems like constituent arse kissing. Without a bicameral approval, followed by executive approval, it carries no weight. The presidents probably continue to sign it just like they continue to kiss babies and shake veterans' hands. It's good for votes. It's like declaring June 10th to be Dog Catcher's Appreciation Day. You can have a big ceremony, but it has no bearing on law.

As far as I can tell, it's not an executive order either (which some debate the Constitutionality of as well).

When it's put up for committee vote, then that's when it's serious.
 
Last edited:
I partially agree. But this is not a US political issue. It's a global issue. This is what certain influential people are pushing - and many people are actually starting to accept (search the internet for people describing themselves as Noahides). One source I read said the greatest number of "Noahides" are in the Philippines, of all places. At this time it's still a comparatively small religious movement, but it's rapidly growing.

The US political sideline is just an illustration of this, it is not the primary issue. Whether that one document is technically a "law" or not in your secular political system is actually irrelevant - the topic is the "Noahide laws", which are called laws by those promoting them, hence the use of the word "law". It simply illustrates the fact that this "Noahide" idea is receiving recognition and support from the highest levels of Western secular government, so is something to be aware of as it could grow into more formal acceptance if not stopped. Best to be aware of this sort of thing before it becomes a secular law.
 
FollowingHim said:
The problem with the US law is that it is not just one law from back in 1991, but is formally reaffirmed every year by every president, on "education day",
Click to expand...

I don't disagree that anything seeking to usurp secular laws and establish religious law (Noahide or Sharia) should be taken seriously. I'm just trying to clean up the language being used. The 1991 declaration and subsequent "Education Days" are not LAWS. A LAW is a very specific thing. I'm not trying to be pedantic' or necessarily disagreeing with you in principle, but at this point, it's only something to keep an eye on, not be overly concerned with (my opinion) because there are no real attempts to formalize this into LAW that I can tell.

For all you folks around my age, you'll get a blast from the past in this video.

 
The Kushners are a major concern. Ivanka isn't actually called Ivanka any more, when marrying she didn't just change her surname, but her entire name. She is now Yael Kushner. Her old name Ivanka continues to be used officially and by the media for some reason, probably just so people don't start thinking about what's going on. But she's deeper into this than most realise.
 
FollowingHim said:
The Kushners are a major concern. Ivanka isn't actually called Ivanka any more, when marrying she didn't just change her surname, but her entire name. She is now Yael Kushner. Her old name Ivanka continues to be used officially and by the media for some reason, probably just so people don't start thinking about what's going on. But she's deeper into this than most realise.
Click to expand...

Logical conclusion then would be that Trump is deeper in to this too.
 
FollowingHim said:
The Kushners are a major concern. Ivanka isn't actually called Ivanka any more, when marrying she didn't just change her surname, but her entire name. She is now Yael Kushner. Her old name Ivanka continues to be used officially and by the media for some reason, probably just so people don't start thinking about what's going on. But she's deeper into this than most realise.
Click to expand...

This was news to me. I did not know this. I just told my husband about it and he had no clue as well.
 
FollowingHim said:
Most Christians, including on this forum, are either unaware of these laws
Click to expand...

As for as for me and my wife we've never heard of the noahide laws that I'm aware of.

Since we are doing the day of atonement tomorrow we'll have to watch that 2-hour video.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top