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.