Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ulysses.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!smb From: smb@ulysses.UUCP (Steven Bellovin) Newsgroups: net.religion,net.religion.jewish Subject: Re: Noachic laws Message-ID: <1073@ulysses.UUCP> Date: Thu, 20-Dec-84 18:31:11 EST Article-I.D.: ulysses.1073 Posted: Thu Dec 20 18:31:11 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 21-Dec-84 02:19:10 EST References: <341@pyuxd.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill Lines: 19 Xref: watmath net.religion:5164 net.religion.jewish:1123 > From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) > Newsgroups: net.religion,net.religion.jewish > Subject: Noachic laws > Message-ID: <341@pyuxd.UUCP> > Date: Tue, 18-Dec-84 15:25:58 EST > The point being: what right does any religion have to impose arbitrary laws > on people not under its domain? Do YOU adhere to the laws that other religions > say that you must, even though you are not a member of their sect? Brunson's original article was indeed claiming that everyone should follow those laws. This is, as Rosen points out, a bit arrogant. Let me put the matter in the proper perspective: Judaism says that as a *theological* matter, one need not be Jewish to be "saved" (pick your word here). If one is a non-Jew who follows just those seven laws, then one is considered righteous. That's a far cry from saying I want to compel you to follow them; rather, it's a contrast to religions that proclaim that they are the only path to salvation.