The 7 Noah Laws There was never a Blasphemy Law



70 Nations Invited to Recognize Sanhedrin in Jerusalem

“On Monday night, approximately one thousand people gathered at the foot of the Temple Mount for the World Creation Concert. However, what took place was not merely wonderful music accompanied by a spectacular light show: the event actually encapsulated several prophetic incidents taking place at once. In the not-so-distant future, the event may be identified as the moment a new, Biblically correct United Nations was established, potentially leading to a new era of global cooperation…

“For several months preceding the event, the Sanhedrin had worked to contact foreign governments, inviting them to take their place as representatives of the 70 nations who populated the world, listed in the Bible as the grandsons of Noah. Honduras, Guatemala and Mexico answered the call, sending high-ranking delegations to attend.

“Rabbi Hillel Weiss, spokesman for the Sanhedrin described that the concert has a vital role to play in helping the nations of the world in joining together to address these universal threats the world today.

“‘The world is being threatened in so many ways; ecologically, atomic weapons, terrorism, economically,’ Rabbi Weiss told Breaking Israel News. ‘The United Nations has failed to unite the world in any effort to cope with these issues. That is because the UN is not based on Biblical principles that unite mankind. Human rights originated in the Bible, as did laws governing war. Ecology is a Biblical concept. When the nations came to Jerusalem to pray together in the Temple, they did so in recognition of the human principles that we all share. The United Nations rejected these human principles that bind and as such, has become a political battlefield that only makes these problems worse. They have appointed human rights violators to preside over the Human Rights Council. There is no justice in the International Court of Justice.’…

“We are seeing the end of the UN, as the US and Israel separate themselves from it, ‘Rabbi Weiss said. ‘The United Nations should have collapsed long ago but it has drawn power from its decision to establish the State of Israel in 1948.’

“The Biblical Sanhedrin in Jerusalem was a gathering point for universal cooperation and justice. The high-point of the concert came when the foreign representatives went up to the stage to sign an agreement with the Sanhedrin.”

Sanhedrin Invites Nikki Haley to be Honorary President of Organization of Seventy Nations

Sanhedrin Issues Nikki Haley Commemorative Coin

Israeli Group Mints Trump Coin to Honor Recognition of Jerusalem



Barbara Aho

February 1, 2019

A researcher in Alberta, Canada who writes informative updates on the US/Israel plan to attack Iran believes “There is more than enough evidence regarding the attack/war with Iran, looming. Probably within weeks.” (See: The Coming Storm)

On the home front, President Trump may yet declare a national state of emergency in order to secure the southern U.S. border with a steel barrier. These events, plus the inevitable civil unrest, would be the perfect storm for Trump to declare Martial Law, which would suspend the Bill of Rights. The inalienable rights of American citizens would be lost overnight: Freedom of Religion, Speech, and the Press, The Right to Bear Arms, the Right to Life, Liberty, and Property, the Right to a Speedy and Public Trial by Jury, with the Presumption of Innocence and Due Process under Constitutional Law and Domestic Privacy; also forfeited would be Protections from Excessive Bail, Fines, Cruel and Unusual Punishments, Unreasonable Searches and Seizures. 

Christians have for the most part expressed solidarity with Trump’s genocidal crusade in the Middle East and a border wall, which may end the tidal wave of illegal immigration but will also prevent U.S. citizens from leaving the country when their Constitutional rights are abrogated.  Many Christian churches have been infused with the liberal Social Gospel through government and corporate faith-based funding, which requires them to welcome sexual perversion into their congregations. Most seminaries have been receiving these federal and corporate grants for years, which explains why young ministers today think they must ‘engage the culture’ and ‘work for the common good’ instead of preach the gospel.

The book of Revelation prophesies a period of unprecedented violence, suffering and genocide, when peace will be taken from the earth, after which a kingdom shall arise that will devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.  This rebellious world will not repent of its sexual perversion despite the warnings and judgments of God,  

Mankind is presently rushing headlong into this Tribulation period but large swaths of the Church seem not to notice. The Reformed think the theocracy they are building is the Kingdom of God. Instead of stanching the floodtide of sin in the culture, the apostate Church has joined the culture and is leading the human race to Judgment.

Luke 21:35 warns “For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.” The day of the Lord will take the world and the apostate Church by surprise.









IX Marks is the church planting organization of Mark Dever, the pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist, a Southern Baptist church located on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. six blocks from the United States Capitol.  Jonathan Leeman is the Editorial Director of IX Marks which ministers to a network of over 4,000 churches internationally. 

Jonathan Leeman has Masters degrees from the London School of Economics and Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He also has a Ph.D. in “political theology” from the University of Wales which was established by Royal Charter in 1893 and whose Chancellor is Prince Charles of Wales. The London School of Economics is not found in Leeman’s various biographical profiles probably because it was funded in 1894 by the Third-Way socialist/fascist Fabian Society which established the LSE to educate and train an elite workforce to carry out the schemes of the British Eugenics Society. IX Marks, the organization of Cambridge-educated Mark Dever, equips pastors and church leaders to preach and put into practice the Social Gospel. Most of the Reformed leadership have advanced degrees from universities in the United Kingdom—Oxford, Cambridge, London School of Economics, University of Edinburgh—whose liberal theology and politics have liberalized the Church of England and the UK.

Graduates of these institutions of Marxist learning have migrated to the U.S. as agents of social change. They have infiltrated our seminaries, colleges and denominations for the purpose of shipwrecking Christian faith in America, especially of university and seminary students. The Reformed New Calvinist movement has theologically and often physically taken over Christian churches. Posturing as the “conservative resurgence” (launched in the late 70s by Banner of Truth Trust UK) Reformed operatives are now peddling every liberal theological and political position of the radical Left, including sexual perversion, abortion, Marxism, Gnosticism, racism, illegal immigration, etc. (See Thomas Littleton’s articles)

In the photo below, Mark Dever and Jonathan Leeman are speaking to pastors at the 2018 Southern Baptist Convention on the need to abandon their conservative convictions, such as pro-life, in order to advance political agendas for social justice.  (See“9Marks Dever & Fabian Socialist Lecture Pastors on How to Ditch Your Pro-Life Voting Habit”)

Apparently in the Reformed Calvinist SBC a doctorate in “political theology” from a secular university qualifies one as a theologian who is competent to counsel Christian ministers about moral issues like abortion. Jonathan Leeman’s political theology degree sounds more like a religious cover for political operatives like him to move conservative Christians away from sound doctrine into liberal theology and politics. Interesting that Dever and Leeman chose to publicly advocate for pro-abortion voting as a Christian option just months before the 2018 elections which filled the vacated Republican seats in the House of Representatives and many state governments with radical liberals.  Who knew that the prospect of legalizing infanticide would follow in the soon to be euthanized USA?  Did Dever and Leeman have prior knowledge of this plan to legalize the murder of newborn babies?  Abortion leading to infanticide will pave the legal road to euthanasia which will lead to the mass extermination of Christians, which is the subject of this report.   

There are many such left-wing political operatives in the New Calvinist movement. Having assisted the ruin of the faith and morals of future generations with their pseudo apologetics, the New SBC Calvinists are now positioned to offer their predetermined alternative to conservative Christianity and Western Civilization through their Fabian Socialist spokesman, Jonathan Leeman, who also advocates for revolution in his book, Political Church: The Local Assembly as Embassy of Christ’s Rule:

“I am not positive there is biblical license for overturning an unjust government, but I think there probably is, and I believe that Genesis 9:5-6 provides that licence…

“Rebellion is justified not according to the withdrawal of consent (since consent is not what creates the obligation to obey); rebellion is justified when the government fails to do what God has obligated it to do (since God creates the obligation to obey by assigning government with its task).

“In other words, the formally designated holder of the sword has no authority to set aside the demands of the justice mechanism in the process of fulfilling its mandate, lest it boomerang back and strike him as it does the vigilante. The mere fact that a particular government is in place by God’s secret providence does not mean that all its actions or directives are morally legitimate. God gives authority to government for certain ends only, and its rule is legitimate to the extent it pursues just ends by just means. A characteristically unjust government, by virtue of its injustice, has exceeded its authorization and self-refuted its own mandate, thereby triggering the operations of God’s Noahic justice mechanism to strike back. And precisely because Scripture does not specify how a society must form a government, it just might leave a society with the freedom to topple an unjust ruler and to establish a new one by just means.”

Leeman, Jonathan. Political Church: The Local Assembly as Embassy of Christ’s Rule (Studies in Christian Doctrine and Scripture) (pp. 195-196). InterVarsity Press.

Political Church is not a theological treatise of “Studies in Christian Doctrine and Scripture” as stated in the subtitle. It is political propaganda which advocates for the replacement of secular governments, which have not produced the desired utopia, with a global theocracy. The book promotes the Jewish Polity (government by theocracy) of the Old Testament, with a flimsy, legalistic application to the New Testament Church. (Polity; 1. a form or process of civil government or constitution. 2. an organized society; a state as a political entity. New Oxford Dictionary)

“…my political theology depends upon a doctrine of two ages… Just as the state is a political institution because it has been authorized by a King to borrow and wield his own sword in the ‘age of creation’ upon rebellious subjects, so the local church is a political institution because it has been authorized by a King to borrow and wield his own office keys for declaring who is and who is not a citizen in the ‘age of new covenant.’…. Local church membership, like good works, is the mark, proof, badge or, to use citizenship language, ‘passport’ of a true Christian.” (p. 295)

This description resembles the “political theology” of the Roman Catholic Church which blended Old Testament theocratic rule with Babylonian worship. We have seen how their “church polity” has turned out. (See Mystery Babylon: Catholic or Jewish?)  In fact, political theology is a course of study in Catholic universities such as the Catholic University of America in Washington, DC and Villanova University in Pennsylvania.

Jonathan Leeman’s Political Church is calculated to Judaize and politicize the Christian Church. Leeman conceives of the New Testament Church as a political institution having a legal contract with God—a ‘new covenant’ which is an extension of the old covenants between Yahweh and his former ‘subjects.’ Leeman’s version of the new covenant minimizes the personal and intimate relationship between the Jesus Christ and His Church. Salvation is a legal arrangement, a contract, after which the Christian is ‘tasked’ as a ‘citizen’ installed in the ‘body politic’ of Jesus’ ‘regime’ with the civic duty of displaying God’s righteousness to the world.  


“Jesus. We start with Jesus. The New Testament declares Jesus to be the new Adam, the offspring of Abraham, the true Israel and the son of David who will rule over Yahweh’s new covenant body politic….

“I will argue that Jesus Christ came as the new Adam to execute God’s kingdom rule through the new covenant in the salvation of God’s people, thereby establishing them individually as God’s citizens and corporately as his model body politic before the nations….

“Jesus Christ, as the new Adam, manifested God’s rule through the prophetically promised new covenant by saving God’s people, the church. Specifically, he fulfills these prophetic promises by declaring that the nations belong to him, forgiving once-rebellious subjects by offering a new covenant in his blood, installing them as citizens within his regime, tasking them with displaying the heavenly Father’s righteousness and justice in their political life together before the onlooking nations, and granting them his Spirit to these ends.” (p. 297)

Jesus’ regime? The language is absurd, portraying Jesus as a military dictator instead of a Savior. Did God so hate the world thathe sent his only begotten Son to establish a ‘regime’ and a ‘political institution’ to improve his image and enforce his commands in the world?” Maybe in the Political Bible but not in the inspired Word of God.

The problem is with Leeman’s Reformed Calvinist theology, which is the man-centered Dominionist / Reconstructionistphilosophy of Rousas Rushdoony that the Church must create an earthly Kingdom of God before Jesus returns. Jesus Christ is not the “new Adam,” as Leeman avers, but the “last Adam” according to Scripture. “And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.” 1 Cor. 15:46 (KJV)  The accurate translation of this verse is crucial to understanding the Cross, the Gospel and Christian sanctification.  A very helpful exposition of 1 Cor. 15:45-47 is found in Watchman Nee’s classic, The Normal Christian Life:

“The death of the Lord Jesus is inclusive. The resurrection of the Lord Jesus is alike inclusive. We have looked at the first chapter of I Corinthians to establish the fact that we are ‘in Christ Jesus’. Now we will go to the end of the same letter to see something more of what this means. In I Corinthians 15:45,47 two remarkable names or titles are used of the Lord Jesus. He is spoken of there as ‘the last Adam’ and He is spoken of too as ‘the second man’. Scripture does not refer to Him as the second Adam but as ‘the last Adam’; nor does it refer to Him as the last Man, but as ‘the second man’. The distinction is to be noted, for it enshrines a truth of great value.  

“As the last Adam, Christ is the sum total of humanity; as the second Man He is the Head of a new race. So we have here two unions, the one relating to His death and the other to His resurrection. In the first place His union with the race as ‘the last Adam’ began historically at Bethlehem and ended at the cross and the tomb. In it He gathered up into Himself all that was in Adam and took it to judgment and death. In the second place our union with Him as ‘the second man’ begins in resurrection and ends in eternity—which is to say, it never ends—for, having in His death done away with the first man in whom God’s purpose was frustrated, He rose again as Head of a new race of men, in whom that purpose shall be fully realized.  

“When therefore the Lord Jesus was crucified on the cross, He was crucified as the last Adam. All that was in the first Adam was gathered up and done away in Him. We were included there. As the last Adam He wiped out the old race; as the second Man He brings in the new race. It is in His resurrection that He stands forth as the second Man, and there too we are included. ‘For if we have become united with him by the likeness of his death, we shall be also by the likeness of his resurrection’ (Romans 6:5). We died in Him as the last Adam; we live in Him as the second Man. The Cross is thus the power of God which translates us from Adam to Christ.” (The Normal Christian Life)

Jonathan Leeman’s reference to Jesus Christ as the ‘new Adam’ and ‘second Adam’ is calculated to leave the office of ‘last Adam’ vacant, to be filled by another. As Thomas Littleton wrote, “On the issue of the Last Adam – the idea of a second Adam – as if to leave the door open for another looks like the perfect door for anti Christ. There is no need for another to come. No need for a second but for the last Adam – because this is the resurrected Christ – the Prince of Life whom death could not hold, talked about in the great Resurrection chapter – 1st Corinthians 15.”

Leeman must resort to misquoting Scripture to support his false “second Adam” teaching. His misleading interpretation of the Cross of Christ continues:

Recommissioned in Adam’s office. For our purposes here, we are interested in the fact that the church identifies with Christ in his Adamic office, and that the church is deputized as possessing a renewed Adamic commission. Just as Adam played the role of Everyman and federal head, meaning that all humanity received the commission given to him, so Christ plays the role of second Everyman and second federal head for a new humanity (see Rom 5:12-19). If, then, Adam’s office transmits to Christ, it would seem that the same office likewise transmits to Christ’s people. Greg Beale observes, It is important to recall that Jesus’s titles ‘Son of Man and ‘Son of God’ reflect respectively both the OT figures of Adam and Israel. This is because . . . Adam and Israel are two sides of one coin. Israel and its patriarchs were given the same commission as was Adam in Gen. 1:26-28. . . . The church is also identified with what it means to be the true Adam, especially in its identification with Jesus, the true Israel and last Adam.

“Just as the church receives Christ’s righteousness, so the church receives Christ’s perfect Adamic sonship. All Christians are declared and named ‘sons’ of God and the new humanity (e.g., 2 Cor 5:17; Gal 3:26, 4:6; cf. 6:16). This is our identity by virtue of the new covenant and new birth. And just as the church ‘puts on’ Christ’s righteousness, so the church ‘puts on’ Adam’s political and priestly vocation. This is our authority and work, again, by virtue of the new covenant and new birth. This combination of identity, work and authority is nothing other than an office, and it is an office for every Christian. Scripture, by referring to Christians as ‘sons’ and ‘born again’ and ‘new creations,’ commission every saint to occupy the office of priest-king with Christ.” (pp. 303-304)

“We also saw that God intended to use a special people to model for the nations what a true politics looks like. When Israel failed at this task, it was handed to the divine Son, who came to do what Adam and Israel could not do. This second Adam, new Israel and Davidic son came to rule obediently by laying down his life for the sins of the nations and rising from the grave. In so doing, he offered a new covenant in his blood, so that all who would repent and believe might receive a pardon from sin and a share in his kingly authority. To that end, he granted them the keys of the kingdom, enabling them to fulfill their covenantal responsibilities to identify themselves with God and one another, distinguish themselves from the world, fend off any serpentine intruders and pursue together the life of righteousness and justice that rightly represent the Son, the Father and the Spirit.” (p. 390)

Nowhere does God’s Word say, “the church puts on Adam’s political and priestly vocation.” Leeman’s political theology, which is liberal theology, gives him license to expound a social gospel which is about fixing this world system. Note the reference to tikkun olam (the repair of the universe) in the excerpt from his book below. The social gospel fosters preoccupation with worldly affairs and law-keeping… instead of the believer’s heavenly citizenship with all spiritual blessings in Christ.

Jonathan Leeman seems to have a low view of the ‘new covenant’ (lower case) as being inferior to the old covenants. The new covenant is merely added onto the series of God’s covenants—the Adamic, Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic—which are incorporated in what is (falsely) termed the Noahic Covenant.

“After the fall, God’s rule was given institutional expression through common and special covenants. His rule exists comprehensively by virtue of the fact that he is creator, which means that human life is intrinsically and comprehensively political, but these political realities formally institutionalize through the covenants. The biblical covenants provide the “constitutionalization’ and “institutionalization’ of human relationships. Daniel Elazar writes,

“The Bible necessarily holds that the covenantal relationship is the only proper basis for political organization—that is, the structured allocating of authority and power among humans—as well. In a political sense, biblical covenants take the form of constituting acts that establish the parameters of authority and its division without prescribing the constituting details of regimes.

“Thus, the Sinai covenant establishes once for all God’s kingship over Israel and the partnership between God and Israel in tikkun olam* (the repair of the universe). It does not establish any particular political regime.

“We can therefore define politics as the mediating of God’s covenantal rule, a definition that encompasses the concept both narrowly conceived (in reference to a society’s governing institutions) and broadly conceived (in reference to all of life).

“Politics narrowly conceived implements God’s sword-wielding covenantal rule invisibly through the justice mechanism of the Noahic covenant (Gen 9:5-6) and visibly through the oaths and institutions of the special covenants.

“Politics broadly conceived is the acknowledgment that all of life exists within the jurisdiction of God’s comprehensive rule or judgment (as indicated in the Adamic covenant), yet it awaits the visible performance of that judgment in the eschaton (the larger share of the Noahic covenant: Gen 9:1-3, 7-17).

“Also, a righteous politics gives rise to righteous and just political communities. The common covenants call all humankind to the citizen’s life of righteousness and justice; the special covenants bear the purpose of putting this just body politic on display as a model to the nations. They make God’s rule visible through (1) the covenantal signs, (2) the terms of the covenants and (3) the activities of salvation or judgment that they either enact or anticipate. Salvation and judgment represent the execution of God’s rule, or the asserting of his royal prerogatives.” (pp. 236-237)

[*“‘Tikkun olam’ (Hebrew for ‘world repair’) has come to connote social action and the pursuit ofsocial justice. The phrase has origins in classical rabbinic literature and in Lurianic kabbalah, a major strand of Jewish mysticism originating with the work of the 16th-century kabbalist Isaac Luria.” (Tikkun Olam: Repairing the World)]

Citing the work of two Jewish professors of political science, Leeman elevates Jewish polity over Christian and other traditions which, they claim, emphasize “structure” or “regime” over relationships:

“The Bible does not moralize the manner in which a government should be formed or the earthly foundation of its sovereignty. In this regard, Christian political philosophers have something to learn once again from Jewish counterparts. Daniel Elazar and Stuart Cohen offer an instructive word from their own tradition: The Jewish political tradition, like every other political tradition, is concerned with the question of power and justice, but it differs from the political traditions growing out of classic Greek thought in that it begins with a concern for relationships rather than structures. More specifically, it is less concerned for the best regime than with the proper relationships between power and justice, the governors and the governed, and God and man.” (pp. 189-190). 

“Elazar and Cohen argue the same. They spend the entirety of a book, The Jewish Polity, chronicling the precise path of institutional change in both the Jewish Bible and post-biblical Jewish commonwealth, while observing the common threads that run through all such changes. They observe that “no single form of political organization is mandated by Jewish law or tradition”; rather, “a Jewish polity is one which embodies a proper set of political relationships rather than any particular structure or regime,” and “there is latitude in choosing the forms of government as long as the proper relationships . . . are preserved.” (p. 230)

May we ask, was the Jewish nation on display in the Old Testament a just body politic until God overthrew the whole system in 70 A.D.?  What about the “post-biblical Jewish commonwealth”?  Have the Jewish people been a stellar example of righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ since they crucified Him?  By what standard does Jonathan Leeman evaluate “a proper set of political relationships?”  Does God require a “proper set of political relationships” or does He require people to be in a proper relationship with Himself through faith in His Son?

Under the Noahic Covenant, the stated divinely ordained purpose of human governments is to enforce the worship of God and the religion of the Old Testament.

“Specifically, I will argue (1) that God rules over all humanity after the fall as a king over subjects with the power of the sword, requiring obedience and worship; (2) that he uses covenants to enact and publicize that rule; (3) that he specifically uses the common covenants to command all people to worship him by acting as his image-bearing citizens; and (4) that he specifically uses the special covenants to create a people who will model true citizenship and worship. The key lies in properly relating the common covenants (the covenants with Adam and Noah) and the special covenants (the Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic and new covenants)…” (pp. 180-181)

“Seventh, the governments of this world exist to aid and abet the cause of true worship by providing the platform for the activity of Adamic citizenship… The proximate goal of government may be judgment. But this proximate goal must not be separated from the ultimate goal, which is to help subjects become citizens and worshipers.

“,,,it makes no sense to say that the Noahic covenant as a whole merely serves ‘common cultural concerns’ and not the cause of worship or religion. Governments invisibly mediate God’s rule over matters of temporal judgment for the larger purpose of abetting God’s plan of salvation. They exist to implement his judgments, which is why Oliver O’Donovan goes as far as to say that ‘within every political society there occurs, implicitly, an act of worship of divine rule. When people assent to a government’s decisions, they implicitly assent to God and thereby honor him. Indeed, this is the very nature of mediated rule. Also, relatedly, common cultural concerns like politics can never be separated from worship. People’s political and cultural convictions always root in their valuations of who or what deserves worship.” (pp. 208-209)

Jesus, however, said that true worship is in the Spirit and sincerity, not in religious ceremonies to be seen of men…“the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.” John 4:23  God rejects worship that is coerced, however, Lucifer will force mankind to worship himself during the Tribulation period. “And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.” Rev. 13:15

God does not command all people to worship Him but He does command all men everywhere to repent. Acts 17:30

Where did Jonathan Leeman come up with this Judaized version of Christianity?

The Chabad Lubavitch Worldwide Institute of Noahide Code presents the same false interpretation of the Old Testament covenants that Jonathan Leeman presents in his book, except the Chabad does not mention their plan for the New Testament Church.

The Noahide Code

“G-d gave the first six commandments to Adam and Hava (Eve), the first human beings.

“These commandments were repeated to Noah, and a seventh commandment was added, when, after the Flood, G-d established the Covenant of the Rainbow with Noah and all of the world’s creatures. This covenant is not dependent on mankind’s observance of these Seven Laws of Noah. Rather, the Noahide Code established the context and the eventual goal for a renewed world in which this covenant could be the open and enduring expression of G-d’s love for His creation…

“The entire Book of Genesis, and the Book of Exodus up to and including the arrival of the Israelites at Mount Sinai, were dictated by G-d to Moses when they arrived there. There was then a first covenant made between G-d and the Israelites on that first part of the Written Torah, which included their acceptance of the Noahide Code. Thus, the Divine moral code of Seven (Universal) Commandments was renewed, after it had become neglected by the rest of the nations. That was four days before the Ten (Jewish) Commandments were spoken openly by G-d to all of the Israelites, at which point they became the Jewish people.

“At Mount Sinai, G-d taught the essentials of the Torah’s precepts through Moses, and this is called the Oral Torah. Included in this are the details of G-d’s directive for all Gentiles to observe their Seven Noahide Commandments. These details, as G-d specified them to Moses, are the true foundation of the universal Noahide Code. A righteous Gentile merits to receive a place in the eternal future World to Come, in the Messianic Era, through observance of these commandments. That is a Gentile’s part in the Torah of Moses, which is G-d’s “Tree of Life” (Proverbs 3:18). It all begins with recognizing the perfect Unity of the Creator.”

The Institute of Noahide Code is an NGO in Special Consultative Status of the United Nations. See also the Institute of Noahide Code on Facebook:

On the list of UN NGOs is also the Ethics & Religious Liberties Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention. As previously mentioned, Jonathan Leeman is the Editorial Director for the IX Marks church planting operation of Mark Dever, who is pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist which is Southern Baptist.  Leeman also has a Masters degree from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, is an adjunct professor and lecturer at SBTS and is affiliated with the ERLC.


Professor Leeman does not enumerate the laws contained in the Noahic Covenant except to state that they incorporate the commands of the covenants God made with Adam, Noah, Moses, Abraham and David.  The Jewish Encyclopedia states that 7 Laws were derived from the Torah by Jewish Rabbis who codified them as the Seven Noachian Laws and made them binding on all mankind. These seven laws actually originated in the Babylonian Talmud.

By: Isidore Singer, Julius H. Greenstone 

The Seven Laws.

“Laws which were supposed by the Rabbis to have been binding upon mankind at large even before the revelation at Sinai, and which are still binding upon non-Jews. The term Noachian indicates the universality of these ordinances, since the whole human race was supposed to be descended from the three sons of Noah, who alone survived the Flood. Although only those laws which are found in the earlier chapters of the Pentateuch, before the record of the revelation at Sinai, should, it would seem, be binding upon all mankind, yet the Rabbis discarded some and, by hermeneutic rules or in accordance with some tradition (see Judah ha-Levi, ‘Cuzari,’ iii. 73), introduced others which are not found there. Basing their views on the passage in Gen. ii. 16, they declared that the following six commandments were enjoined upon Adam: (1) not to worship idols; (2) not to blaspheme the name of God; (3) to establish courts of justice; (4) not to kill; (5) not to commit adultery; and (6) not to rob (Gen. R. xvi. 9, xxiv. 5; Cant. R. i. 16; comp. Seder ‘Olam Rabbah, ed. Ratner, ch. v. and notes, Wilna, 1897; Maimonides, ‘Yad,’ Melakim, ix. 1). A seventh commandment was added after the Flood—not to eat flesh that had been cut from a living animal (Gen. ix. 4). Thus, the Talmud frequently speaks of ‘the seven laws of the sons of Noah,’ which were regarded as obligatory upon all mankind, in contradistinction to those that were binding upon Israelites only (Tosef., ‘Ab. Zarah, ix. 4; Sanh. 56a et seq.”

Like Jonathan Leeman’s Noahic Covenant, the Noahide Laws are an abridgement and distortion of the Noahic Covenant plus the Mosaic Law. (“As in the days of Noë” Matt. 24:37). What might be the source of Leeman’s deceitful handling of God’s Word? The Political Theology Network lists the Talmud among the “classical” texts of political theology. The Babylonian Talmud, which is the bible of modern Judaism, permits the sacrifice of children to Moloch, also called infanticide, which was just made legal in New York. Also commended in the Talmud are pedophilia and bestiality. The Talmud states that Gentiles are subhuman animals and blasphemes Jesus Christ as the illegitimate son of a harlot and a libertine father. “Yeshu” was also a magician who was initiated into the secret doctrine and deceived the people by means of miracles. (See: The Talmud Unmasked, also a review of this book, Genuine verses from the Talmud.)

The Talmud encourages Jews to commit all manner of criminal activity without fear of punishment, but the Jewish Encyclopedia states that the penalty for Gentiles who violate even one of the 7 Noahide Laws is death. Note the disparity. “Due process” is not required in the criminal prosecution of a Noachid / Gentile and the death penalty does not apply to Jews,

“In the elaboration of these seven Noachian laws, and in assigning punishments for their transgression, the Rabbis are sometimes more lenient and sometimes more rigorous with Noachidæ than with Israelites. With but a few exceptions, the punishment meted out to a Noachid for the transgression of any of the seven laws is decapitation, the least painful of the four modes of execution of criminals (see Capital Punishment). The many formalities of procedure essential when the accused is an Israelite need not be observed in the case of the Noachid. The latter may be convicted on the testimony of one witness, even on that of relatives, but not on that of a woman. He need have had no warning (‘hatra’ah’) from the witnesses; and a single judge may pass sentence on him (ib. 57a, b; ‘Yad,’ l.c. ix. 14). With regard to idolatry, he can be found guilty only if he worshiped an idol in the regular form in which that particular deity is usually worshiped; while in the case of blasphemy he may be found guilty, even when he has blasphemed with one of the attributes of God’s name—an action which, if committed by an Israelite, would not be regarded as criminal (ib. 56b; see Blasphemy).


The Noachidæ are required to establish courts of justice in every city and province; and these courts are to judge the people with regard to the six laws and to warn them against the transgression of any of them (ib.; ‘Yad,’ l.c. ix. 14, x. 11; comp. Naḥmanides on Gen. xxxiv. 13, where the opinion is expressed that these courts should judge also cases other than those coming under the head of the six laws, as, for example, larceny, assault and battery, etc.). In the case of murder, if the Noachid slay a child in its mother’s womb, or kill a person whose life is despaired of (‘ṭerefah’), or if he cause the death of a person by starving him or by putting him before a lion so that he can not escape, or if he slay a man in self-defense, the Noachid is guilty of murder and must pay the death-penalty, although under the same circumstances an Israelite would not be executed (ib. 57b; ‘Yad,’ l.c. ix. 4; comp. ‘Kesef Mishneh,’ ad loc.).”

The Noahide Laws are also found in Freemasonry, the secret fraternal organization which descended from the medieval order of the Knights Templar—the Knights of the Order of the Temple of Solomon. According to Albert Mackey’s History of Freemasonry, Rev. James Anderson, the Presbyterian minister and theologian who wrote the Constitutions of Freemasonry, developed the Noachide legend from Ancient Egyptian mystery religion of Hermes Trismegistus, author of the Hermeticum, and the moral laws for Freemasons which were derived from the Rabbinic laws of Talmudic Judaism. Mackey wrote concerning the importance of Noah and the Noahide laws in the Constitutions and Charges of Freemasonry.

  “It is not, therefore, surprising that Noah should have become a mystical personage, and that the modern Speculative Masons should have sought to incorporate some reference to him in their symbolic system…

“In the Dowland MS. and in all the other manuscripts of the Legend of the Craft that succeeded it, the reference to Noah is exceedingly meager, his name only being mentioned, and that of his sons, from whom descended Hermes, who found one of the pillars and taught the science thereon described to other men…

“Anderson, who, in the Book of Constitutions modified and enlarged the old Craft Legends at his pleasure, calls Noah and his three sons ‘all Masons true,’ and says that they brought over from the flood the traditions and arts of the antediluvians and communicated them to their growing offspring. And this was perhaps the first time that the Patriarch was presented to the attention of the Fraternity in a Masonic character.

 “Anderson seems to have cherished this idea, for in the second edition of the Constitutions he still further develops it by saying that the offspring of Noah, ‘as they journeyed from the East (the plains of Mount Ararat, where the Ark rested) toward the West, they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and dwelt there together as NOACHIDÆ, or sons of Noah.’ And, he adds, without the slightest historical authority, that this word, ‘Noachidæ’ was ‘the first name of Masons, according to some old traditions.’…

“Having thus invented and adopted the name as the distinctive designation of a Mason, he repeats it in his second edition or revision of the ‘Old Charges’ appended to the Book of Constitutions. The first of these charges, in the Constitutions of 1723, contained this passage: ‘A Mason is obliged by his tenure to obey the moral law.’ In the edition of 1738, Dr. Anderson has, without authority, completed the sentence by adding the words ‘as a true Noachida.’…

“About that time, or a little later, a degree was fabricated on the continent of Europe, bearing the name of ‘Patriarch Noachite,’ one peculiar feature of which was that it represented the existence of two classes or lines of Masons, the one descending from the Temple of Solomon, and who were called Hiramites, and the other tracing their origin to Noah, who were styled Noachites… the term…has become of so common use that Noachida and Freemason have come to be considered as synonymous terms. 

“What does this word really signify, and how came Anderson to adopt it as a Masonic term? The answers to these questions are by no means difficult.

“Noahchida, or Noachides, from which we get the English Noachite, is a gentilitial name, or a name designating the member of a family or race… And so Noachides, or its synonymous Noachida or Noachites, means descendant of Noah.

“But why, it may be asked, are the Freemasons called the descendants of Noah? Why has he been selected alone to represent the headship of the Fraternity? I have no doubt that Dr. Anderson was led to the adoption of the word by the following reason.

“After Noah’s emergence from the ark, he is said to have promulgated seven precepts for the government of the new race of men of whom he was to be the progenitor.

These seven precepts are: 1, to do justice; 2, worship God; 3, abstain from idolatry; 4, preserve chastity; 5, do not commit murder; 6, do not steal; 7, do not eat the blood.

“These seven obligations, says the Rev. Dr. Raphall, are held binding on all men, inasmuch as all are descendants of Noah, and the Rabbins maintain that he who observes them, though he be not an Israelite, has a share in the future life, and it is the duty of every Jew to enforce their due observance whenever he has the power to do so.

“In consequence of this, the Jewish religion was not confined during its existence in Palestine to the Jewish nation only, but proselytes of three classes were freely admitted. One of these classes was the ‘proselytes of the gate.’… They were not admitted to all the privileges of the Jewish religion… So that, although they were Noachidæ, they were not considered equal to the true children of Abraham.

“Anderson, who was a theologian, was, of course, acquainted with these facts, but with a more tolerant spirit than the Jewish law, which gave converted Gentiles only a qualified reception, he was disposed to admit into the full fellowship of Freemasonry all the descendants of Noah who would observe the precepts of the Patriarch, these being the only moral laws inculcated by Masonry.” (Mackey, pp. 406-410)


On January 17, 1951, the Orthodox Jewish Chabad-Lubavitch elected Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson to be the Lubavitch “Rebbe.”  The “Rebbe,” who is regarded by the International Lubavitch Movement as the “messiah,” was also recognized as a moral leader by many U.S. presidents, starting with President Richard Nixon. According to the Chabad-Lubavitch, the Rebbe enjoyed an especially close relationship with Ronald Reagan, who began the process of giving legislative status to the Lubavitchers’ “ Seven Universal Laws”:

“The President was an early and enthusiastic adherent of the Rebbe’s call to make all people aware of the Seven Universal Laws, based on the belief in a Supreme Being. The Rebbe’s call for a moment of silence in the public schools, and his persistent belief that America must export to the world faith-based moral values, were among the themes that found a welcoming ear in President Reagan.”

In 1982, in honor of the 80th birthday of Rebbe Menachem Schneerson, President Reagan, an Honorary Scottish Rite Mason, issued a declaration, which Congress confirmed, that April 4 would become a National Day of Reflection on the Seven Noahide Laws as a moral code for mankind. 

    “One shining example for people of all faiths of what education ought to be is that provided by the Lubavitch movement, headed by Rabbi Menachem Schneerson, a worldwide spiritual leader who will celebrate his 80th birthday on April 4, 1982. The Lubavitcher Rebbe’s work stands as a reminder that knowledge is an unworthy goal unless it is accompanied by moral and spiritual wisdom and understanding. He has provided a vivid example of the eternal validity of the Seven Noahide Laws, a moral code for all of us regardless of religious faith. May he go from strength to strength.

    “In recognition of the Lubavitcher Rebbe’s 80th birthday, the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled have issued House Joint Resolution 447 to set aside April 4, 1982, as a ‘National Day of Reflection.

    “NOW, THEREFORE, I, RONALD REAGAN, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim April 4, 1982, as National Day Reflection.”

Nine years later, in 1991, the Seven Noahide Laws became Public Law 102-14 after a vote by the U.S. Congress on the recommendation of Reagan’s successor, President George H. W. Bush, a member of the Masonic Order of Skull & Bones (’48). Before a joint session of Congress, President Bush honored Rabbi Menachem Schneerson, the now deceased “messiah” of the Lubavitch Movement, by establishing the observance of Education Day, USA. This national observance was intended “to return the world to the moral and ethical values contained in the Seven Noahide Laws.” In reality, P.L.102-14 established the Talmud as the supreme Law of the Land.

Jared Kushner – Vice President of Friends of Chabad at Harvard

All U.S. Presidents since Richard Nixon have endorsed the Chabad Lubavitch Noahide legislation which the U.S. Congress passed as Public Law 102—14 (H.J. Res. 104) on March 20, 1991. Furthermore, the Lubavitcher Universal Institute of Noahide Code, UN NGO (ECOSOC), being also an international movement, has been endorsed globally by world leaders who will be representing their countries in the Sanhedrin’s Organization of 70 Nations in Jerusalem. 

Government Leaders Encourage Adherence to the Seven Noahide Laws

“Other world leaders have joined the call for further observance and knowledge of these laws. For example, Herman Van RompuyPresident of the European Union wrote (in July, 2014) that he seeks greater ‘dissemination of the universal values known as the Noahide laws’ andMajor General Michael JefferyGovernor General of Australia, lamenting family breakdowns and drug and alcohol abuse in modern society in a 2008 letter wrote that he believed that observing the fundamental values of the Noahide Laws can be an antidote to such ills of society.”

Jewish Sleeper Law Remains Dormant in Canadian House of Commons 

In the House of Commons June 11, 2003

“There are 72 Chabad centres in Canada. There are 37 centres in Quebec, 21 in Ontario, eight in British Columbia, two in Alberta and Manitoba and one in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. These centres serve the needs of Jews no matter what their level of knowledge or observance.

“Only a few weeks ago for the first time ever, Chabad organized a reception here at the House of Commons commemorating the Jewish festival of Purim.”

The Chabad Lubavitch claims that Jews enforcing the Noahide Laws and overseeing their execution will reverse the moral degeneration of mankind and restore the world to the pristine conditions that existed in the Garden of Eden before the fall of Adam and Eve.  Their marketing ploy is that their utopian “new world order” of peace and universal brotherhood will reverse the moral collapse and the global chaos engulfing mankind.

70 Nations Invited to Jerusalem Sanhedrin Declaration, Replace U.N.

“Rabbi Yoel Schwartz, president of the Sanhedrin’s Court for the Noahides, has been charged with preparing the declaration, called “The Song of Israel and the World,” that would describe the spiritual basis for the organization…

Humanity created religions such as Christianity and Islam that served as instruments throughout history to bring humanity closer to this great day, when everyone would recognize the God of the world that was revealed on Mount Sinai in a desert that belongs to no people…

“We see God’s hand clearly in the miracle of the Jewish state that arose again two thousand years after its destruction. It is incumbent upon all those who accompany us to try as much as possible to spread the belief according to the prophets, just as the Jews guarded and observed their words and to prevent, God forbid, the spread of man-made religions. Those who do so must also aid the Jews in observing what God commanded them. God required of the Jews an additional amount, more than he required from the other nations, since the Jews will serve as the priests of the mankind. And the other nations should not, God forbid, try to influence his people to join their religions.”

“Rabbi Dov Stein, secretary of the Sanhedrin, described the need to replace the United Nations: ‘We now live in an era when threats are global and not limited to one country. This is true of weapons, environmental issues, and even social issues. The solutions must come from a universal effort. The United Nations has failed in its mandate by rejecting God as the creator and the Noahide Laws common to all of mankind.’

“As an example, Rabbi Stein described the resolution being drafted to make abortions and assisted suicides a ‘universal human right’ which the rabbi said violated the Noahide law prohibiting murder.

“‘They have rejected the basics of humanity that were given at Sinai,’ he said. ‘We have to re-educate the world in order to address these issues. We need a universal organization that will return to the Bible, re-educate the world. This is not a religious initiative. This is a national initiative with each nation bringing its special aspect, all nations joining together in Jerusalem, where the world was created.’”

Unfortunately, the real agenda of the Sanhedrin is not peace and justice for all but a dystopian world disorder that will destroy civilization.


According to the Noahide Laws, Christians who worship Jesus Christ are guilty of idolatry.

The Noachides & Rome’s Chief Rabbi, Riccardo Di Segni

“In Rome, on January 17, 2002, in the Lecture hall of the Major Roman Pontifical Seminary, a meeting was organized by the Diocese of Rome, part of the Day of Jewish-Christian dialogue. Present on the Catholic side were Cardinal Jorge Maria Mejia and Msgr. Rino Fisichella, and on the Jewish side, Rabbi Riccardo Di Segni, who replaced Rabbi Elio Toaff as Chief Rabbi of Rome…

“Rabbi Di Segni…explains [the seven precepts that all noachides must respect]:

“These rules are: interdiction of all worship except monotheism, interdiction on blasphemy, the obligation to form tribunals, the interdiction on homicide, theft, adultery, and incest, and the interdiction on eating food torn from living animals.

“…The Rabbi’s attention is completely fixed on the first precept, that of monotheism: ‘As to the monotheist cult, apparently, it poses no doubt for the major religions.’ Aren’t  Judaism, Christianity and Islam defined, in post-conciliar language that has become colloquial today,  as ‘the three major monotheist religions’? In fact, Di Segni sees no difficulty in defining  Muslims as strict and even circumcised monotheists. But, as to Christians, he has some doubts…. 

Christians: Monotheists or Idolators?

“This is where Di Segni—who is the author of the re-publication of the Toledoths Jehsu, under the new title, Il Vangelo del Ghetto [The Gospel of the Ghetto], with the Toledoths Jehsu being  the most inflammatory Jewish legends against Jesus (1)—‘speaks clearly’ to the prelates who heard him:

“At the point we have now reached, it is necessary to make a clarification on Jewish theology, which, on the subject of monotheism and how it is lived by Christianity, gives rise to a debate that is essentially a dilemma. The point in question is in view of establishing whether Jesus’ divinity can be compatible, for a non-Jew (because for a Jew it is absolutely not) with the monotheistic concept.  

“In other words: The Jew who would become a Christian, thus then believing in the divinity of Jesus, would cease to be a monotheist in order to become an idolater. Must one say the same thing of a non-Jew? Is believing in Jesus’ divinity a sin of idolatry, a violation of the first precept of the Noachide law? Rabbi Di Segni advises:

“‘As to be expected, in Jewish theology, the answer to this question is not unanimous: some firmly deny it, others place certain conditions on it. The consequence is that, according to the literal opinion, the Christian would not be on the path of salvation’ since he is guilty of idolatry

“Di Segni concludes: ‘If one must literally apply the Noachide system of laws, it [the punishment of death] would be applied to all, so that the Noachides might observe it. Likewise, the punishment of death would apply to what treats forbidding the worship of strange gods,’ in view of monotheism.”

Source: “The Noachides and Rome’s Chief Rabbi, Riccardo Di Segni,” Father Francesco Ricossa, Sodalitium, French Edition, No. 53, July, 2002, translated by Suzanne M. Rini, Trans Et Alia, Vol. 3, Nowa 3, Sept. 2002.

The Chief Rabbi of Rome was putting the Roman Catholic hierarchy on notice that the Jewish elite, which even now controls the world from behind the scenes, will soon have legal authority to prosecute and execute Christians for the crime of idolatry.  According to the Sodalitium article, not one of the Vatican prelates protested the agenda of the Jews: “Today, the unthinkable has been realized. But the Cardinals present at the lecture of…Rabbi Di Segni, keep silent.” Nor did the prelates question the Jewish power in a court of law.

In a 2006 meeting on Rome’s Capitol Hill, the same Rabbi di Segni who threatened the execution of those who worship Jesus Christ, met with Roman Catholic, Muslim and Jewish leaders in a show of interfaith unity. What do the leaders of Roman Catholicism, Islam and Jewry have in common? Are they conspiring to enforce the Noahide Laws to eliminate their common enemy, Christians and Christianity?

From left, Romes Chief Rabbi Riccardo Di Segni, President of the St. Egidio Community Andrea Riccardi, Pontifical Council of Interreligious Dialogue’s French Cardinal Paul Jean Poupard, Secretary of the Islamic Cultural Center Abdallah Redouane, Rome’s Mosque Imam Sami Salem, Rome Mayor Walter Veltroni, and President of the Jewish Community of Rome Leone Pasermann join their hand in unison at the end of an interreligious meeting held in Rome’s Capitol Hill, Tuesday, Sept. 19, 2006. Three top religious representatives – Di Segni, Salem, and Poupard – gathered Tuesday in a symbolic meeting to present a new magazine and called for renewed interreligious dialogue, only days after Pope Benedict XVI’s remarks about Islam and violence prompted anger in part of the Muslim world. (AP Photo/Pier Paolo Cito) (Corriere Della Sera, Martedì 19 Settembre 2006, 18:19)

In 2013, on March 20, which was the feast of Passover, Rabbi de Signi was warmly welcomed at the Vatican by Pope Francis.

“Here is a translation of the note that Pope Francis sent to the Chief Rabbi of Rome, Riccardo di Segni, for the feast of Passover, which starts today at sundown. The Holy Father met Rabbi di Segni on March 20, during his audience with delegations from other Christian confessions and non-Christian religions.

“A few days on from our meeting, and with renewed gratitude for your having desired to honor the celebration of the beginning of my ministry with your presence and that of other distinguished members of the Jewish community, I take great pleasure in extending my warmest best wishes to you and Rome’s entire Jewish community on the occasion of the Great Feast of Pesach. May the Almighty, who freed His people from slavery in Egypt to guide them to the Promised Land, continue to deliver you from all evil and to accompany you with His blessing. I ask you to pray for me, as I assure you of my prayers for you, confident that we can deepen [our] ties of mutual esteem and friendship. – FRANCIS  [Translation by Vatican Radio]” (Zenit)


Meanwhile, in Jerusalem, Orthodox Jewish yeshivas have been educating Jews about the forthcoming Jewish monarchy, their Jewish privilege and the draconian Noahide laws. The Kingdom of Israel will be the Antichrist’s servile slave state into which the damnable heresy of Dominionist / Kingdom Theology of the Calvinists is leading those who believe their false teachings.

Kingdom of Israel: Extremist Rabbis Dream of Jewish Monarchy, With a Special Role for Non-Jews

Having a king seems like such a simple concept. Instead of the tiresome processes of democracy, a king can be anointed – a single sovereign with extraordinary rights who can enslave prisoners of war and do as he pleases. No elections and no High Court of Justice.

The second part of “Torat Hamelech” (“The King’s Torah”) – written by rabbis from the Od Yosef Hai yeshiva in the West Bank settlement of Yitzhar – is written in the language of halakha (Jewish religious law) and quotes Jewish sources, while revealing the secret aspirations of the most extremist settlers.

The compendium is devoted entirely to laws pertaining to “the public and the kingdom.” In other words, to the establishment of a religious-Jewish monarchy that will replace secular democracy in Israel. It describes a world in which the king is omnipotent, owning slaves and handmaidens. A world in which Jews have extra rights and non-Jews cannot hold public office; a world in which there is no private property (everything belongs to the king) and rebels are put to death…

The first volume of “The King’s Torah” concerned laws relating to life and death between Jews and non-Jews. It detailed the laws that permit the killing of non-Jews under different circumstances – such as during wartime, or when a non-Jew threatens a Jew.

The new volume gives a set of – totally dystopian – laws that will prevail in the kingdom of Israel. It discusses how the king will be chosen; what his rights will be; and what rights (if any) his subjects will have…

The first chapters in the second volume of “The King’s Torah” dwell on the importance of anointing an Israeli king, and how he is to be chosen. “Everybody needs a king,” the text explains, quoting Pirkei Avot: “If not for awe of the king, people would eat each other alive.” The king is, naturally, an authoritative leader. The power of the kingdom is based on the people’s need for it to exist. The king is “given power to take care of himself, not just the public partnership,” they explain – and this is for the greater good, because “the king encompasses the entire nation, and the good of the nation depends upon him.”

Maimonides (also known as the Rambam), the authors note, writes that gentiles who respond to the call to peace and immediately agree to convert need to understand that they will remain inferior and unfit for any office in Israel. The Rambam’s intention, they clarify, was that gentiles should be treated with compassion, but should not participate in government.

Regarding non-Jews who do not observe the Seven Laws of Noah, they add that the Rambam says gentiles we conquer become like slaves to us; it is permissible not to return a loan to a gentile, since the failure to involve them in decisions amounts to less than expropriating a loan as it does not involve financial loss.

According to WikiNoah. a United Noachide Council is training Yeshiva students from every country to be Noachide Judges:

United Noachide Council

“One of the primary organization’s goals and future purpose is to support a democratically run General Noachide Council that represents the interests and needs of ‘All’ Noachide Communities throughout the world, and ultimately to support a Supreme United Noachide Council composed of only qualified Noachide judges which will have graduated from a yeshiva for B’nei Noach in Israel.

“Branch UNC, Inc. organizations are in process of formation at various locations throughout the world. The goal of the UNC, Inc. organization is to have branches in every country….

“The goals of the United Noachide Council are:

“To set up a democratically run Noachide Council, which will seek to sponsor Noachide Yeshiva students from every Noachide Country in the world to study to become fully qualified Noachide Judges. A five to ten year Hebrew only program of study in Noachide and Oral Laws is currently being formulated and will be administered by Various Orthodox Rabbis, and will be located in Israel.”


The Orthodox Jewish yeshivas are also teaching Christians. This is a trap for Zionist and Messianic Christians. They will not be learning the Torah but the oral traditions of the Rabbis, and Jewish magic from the Talmud, and the Kabbalah, which is Jewish mysticism and the Soul of Judaism.

Yeshivas for Christians? Evangelicals Flock to Jewish Learning Centers in Israel

Whether online or at actual brick-and-mortar facilities in the Holy Land, thousands of evangelical Christians are increasingly turning to Jewish educators in pursuit of ‘authentic Torah teaching’

“It’s become a phenomenon,” Rivkah Lambert Adler, an Orthodox-Jewish educator, told Haaretz. “What we’re seeing is a profound hunger and thirst among Christians for authentic Torah teaching.”

Haaretz said Lambert Adler, who published a book on the subject last year called “Ten From the Nations: Torah Awakening Among Non-Jews,” said many evangelicals “see the Jewish people as leaders in Bible scholarship and as individuals who are able to open the door to a better understanding of the Hebraic roots of their own faith.”

One of the first ventures of its kind, Root Source, was launched in April 2014 by Gidon Ariel, an Orthodox Jew, and Bob O’Dell, a Christian philanthropist and high-tech entrepreneur.

Online subscribers to Root Source can access prerecorded lectures on topics such as biblical Hebrew, women in the Bible, Jewish prayer, the Holy Temple, God, Moses and the Book of Proverbs.

Founder AnaRina Heymann says there is “a genuine and growing wave of interest from pro-Israel Christians, and we have a responsibility to respond and engage through the common ground of biblical narrative – which in turn provides them with advocacy tools to stand with us against the growing wave of anti-Semitism in the world.”…

Lambert Adler estimates that “a few thousand” Christians have participated in classes offered by this new crop of yeshivas now open to them. The only hindrance to growth, she said, is the lack of qualified and available teachers.

She acknowledged that Orthodox Jews in general tend to be “very defensive about Christians.”

“We tend not to trust them, we tend to think they have a missionizing agenda 100 percent of the time, and we tend to want them to just leave us alone,” she said.



Arthur Greenwood of British War Cabinet Sends Message of Assurance Here


English Rabbi Delivers to Dr. S.S. Wise

New Statement on Question After War

October 6, 1940

“In the first public declaration on the Jewish question since the outbreak of the war, Arthur Greenwood, member without portfolio in the British War Cabinet, assured the Jews of the United States that when victory was achieved an effort would be made to found a new world order based on the ideals of ‘justice and peace.’

“Mr. Greenwood, who is Deputy Leader of the British Labor party, declared that in the new world the conscience of civilized humanity would demand that the wrongs suffered by the Jewish people in so many countries should be righted.’ He added that after the war an opportunity would be given to Jews everywhere to make a ‘distinctive and constructive contribution’ in the rebuilding of the world.” continue…

Vengeance is Mine: The Great Tribulation as a Purim Sacrifice by Emma Elmer  

“The Jews see the destruction of their enemies as part of the deliverance of their god. They consider their actions as part of God’s divine plan for the destruction of the Amalekites. The deliverance of the Jews from all enemies became part of the plan for all ages. The Jews were to always be delivered from their enemies through their own actions. They did not wait for God to act. They took action unto themselves and asked God to bless it. It has been thus ever since. There is no turning the other cheek. There is no forgiving enemies or praying for those who despitefully used them. There is only death, and the death of their enemies meant God had blessed them.

“Unfortunately, Christians believe the same thing. They too expect God to deliver the Jews from all modern enemies through overwhelming fire power. The death of innocents is just God’s blessing on the Jews. The Feast of Purim is from where this idea comes. God is expected to perform for “His” people regardless of repentance or righteousness. It is true the people fasted, but no where is it recorded that the fast led to a deeper knowledge of God and repentance from sin. That is because the Jew does not have any knowledge of personal sin. All sin is national. According to the Rabbis, Jews are ‘saved’ by their own blood. This destruction of their enemies by the Jews is known as the law of vendetta. We can see this law enacted every day in modern Israel. That is what happens when Jews come into political and military power. All who oppose them are marked for destruction and God will bless it.

“The law-of-vendetta is a blood feud. There is no ending it. It is the Jewish Hatfields and McCoys. The law is based on old Babylonian law. It has found its way into modern jurisprudence under the name lex talionis, or law of retaliation. The Bible calls it an ‘eye for an eye.’ This means that the punishment should be equal to the offence. Of course, Jewish retaliation is always 10 times greater than the offence. That, too, was evident in the Book of Esther. Revenge is a trait so ingrained so deeply into the Jewish consciousness that it is almost genetic. A Jew never forgives and never forgets. They still avenge supposed wrongs to their tribe committed 1,000 or 2,000 years ago.

“Breach for breach, eye for eye, a tooth for a tooth: as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again.” (Leviticus 24:20)

“Vengeance is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord.” (Rom. 12:19)

The time “18:15” on Prince Harry’s iPhone is military time for 6:15 p.m. which may be a code for a date, probably on the Hebrew calendar, which is Adar 15, which is the Talmudic celebration of Purim. Purim is not a Biblical feast but a “day of the Jews’ own choosing” to execute vengeance for their captivity in Babylon based on Esther 9.

In 2003, President George W. Bush announced he would commence the bombing of Iraq at the “time of our choosing” which turned out to be March 17 or Adar 13, the Fast of Esther, the day before Purim.

Researcher in Alberta, Canada who writes informative updates on the US/Israel plan to attack Iran: “There is more than enough evidence regarding the attack/war with Iran, looming. Probably within weeks.”

Purim falls this year on March 20, 2019.

“March” is derived from Mars, the Roman god of War.







The Trap! Nikki Haley Sanhedrin’s pick for President of 70 Nations Organization

Sanhedrin Invites Nikki Haley to be Honorary President of Organization of 70 Nations

Sanhedrin Issues Nikki Haley Commemorative Coin

Sanhedrin Invites 70 Nations to Hannukah Dedication of 3rd Temple Alt


President Reagan Welcomed Lubavitcher Rebbe Menachem & Congress Established National Day of Reflection  

Under the Talmudic Noahide Laws

Sanhedrin Calls President Trump to Uphold Noahide Laws

Moldova Praised for Adopting Antisemitism Definition

MARTIAL LAW           

White House Drafting National Emergency Proclamation to Include Border Wall

Rabbi Yekutiel Fish: Lunar Eclipse Sign Jews Must Leave Diaspora

Biblical Origin of 70 Nation Anti-Israel Paris Conference


An IDF Air Strike in Syria in Broad Daylight and a Dangerous Reply  

Did War Just Begin: Iran Fires Rocket at Golan. Intelligence Minister: This is Open Confrontation  


Rabbi Schneerson

“But his leadership transcended the monastic world of philosophical debates and book-lined studies like his own, penetrating the secular world with toll-free telephone numbers, satellite television hookups and faxes of Talmudic disquisitions. Fusing the 18th century with the 20th, he presided over a religious empire that reached from the back streets of Brooklyn to the main streets of Israel and by 1990 was taking in an estimated $100 million a year in contributions. His ‘mitzvah tanks’ — converted campers that are rolling recruiting stations whose purpose is to draw Jews to the Lubavitch way — roamed streets from midtown Manhattan to Crown Heights. And the Lubavitchers’ Brooklyn-based publishing house claimed to be the world’s largest distributor of Jewish books.”

Rabbi Schneerson Led a Small Hasidic Sect to World Prominence

Chabad Met with Benjamin Netanyahu

Will End of Netanyahu’s Coalition Signal Beginning of Messiah

Hundreds of Thousands in Donations Tie Kushner & Trump to Chabad

Kushner Foundation Gives $342k  to Chabad

Kushner Foundation Bankrolls Radical Jewish West Bank Settlers

Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner Visit Lubavitcher Rebbe’s Grave

Trump to Endorse Chabad Movement in Event Attended by Jewish Leaders

Trump Meets with Chabad Leaders in Oval Office 


7 Days Until Dedication of 3rd Temple Altar

“…the Sanhedrin’s ongoing effort [is] to establish a Bible-based international organization to replace the United Nations.

Rabbi Yoel Schwartz, president of the Sanhedrin’s Court for the Noahides, has been charged with preparing the declaration, called “The Song of Israel and the World,” that would describe the spiritual basis for the organization…

“These are the seven messages of the Creator of the world to humanity known as the Seven Noahide Laws:..

2. “Blessing Hashem (God, literally ‘the name’): Respecting the Creator and the sages who are familiar with His Torah, and respecting the places of worship where the Torah is learned and prayers are recited to him.It is forbidden, God forbid, to speak harshly against them or to curse them

 4. “Laws: To establish courts to judge justice and to direct society and obey the orders and decisions of the courts.

 *   *   *

“And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:” Rev. 6:9

“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. Rev. 20:4

The Seal of Solomon: Mark of the Beast

Chapter # 32 San Juan County National Assembly for the National Government of the State of New Mexico



Join us on Telegram!Join our channel!

DonationsDONATION$10$20$30$40$50$60Other Amount:Organization:

SearchSearch for:



Recent Galleries

The First Broadcast of THE T-ROH SHOW

The First Broadcast of THE T-ROH SHOWview

The Second Broadcast of THE T-ROH SHOW

The Second Broadcast of THE T-ROH SHOWview

The Third Broadcast of THE T-ROH SHOW

The Third Broadcast of THE T-ROH SHOWview



  • 63,703 hits



The American National Press Union, a professional Union that promotes the highest standards in publication of record, filing of evidence, and performance of judicial investigations, acknowledges concern for every person’s need to be fully informed of the facts of any case.

Reporters operate as trustees of the Public. The primary objective is to conduct a thorough investigation to be published as a matter of Public Record.

This code is intended to promote the highest quality of reporting in all its forms and to strengthen public confidence in the profession. This code also serves as an educational tool for those who practice, and for those who appreciate, comprehensive reporting. To that end, The American National Press Union sets forth the following.

Code of Ethics

Reporters are accountable for upholding the following standards in their daily investigations:

  1. Be accurate and comprehensive in filing and reporting.
  2. Resist being manipulated by staged events, misrepresentations and false evidence.
  3. Be complete and provide context. Avoid stereotyping people. Maintain objectivity. Reporters communicate/present documented or verifiable facts and avoid presenting one’s own bias and opinions in the investigation.
  4. Treat all people with respect and dignity. Give special consideration to vulnerable victims and compassion to victims of crime or tragedy. Intrude when there is probable cause to believe that a crime is being committed or probable cause to believe that there is evidence of a crime to be filed and reported.
  5. Do not intentionally contribute to, alter, or seek to alter or influence evidence.
  6. Do not manipulate evidence (images, documents or audio) to enhance impact mislead the Public or misrepresent the facts.
  7. Do not pay or otherwise reward sources for evidence.
  8. Do not accept gifts, favors, or compensation from those that seek to influence the facts, alter evidence or conceal a crime.
  9. Do not intentionally sabotage the efforts of other reporters as they too, are trustees of the Public.
  10. As reports are the Public’s business and become part of the Public record, it is imperative that all evidence and claims are verified and all sources are cited accurately

Reporters are required to:

  1. Ensure that the Public’s business is conducted in an ethical manner and defend the rights of access for all reporters.
  2. Think proactively, as a student of psychology, sociology, politics and art to develop a unique vision and presentation. Work with a voracious appetite for justice.
  3. Strive for total and unrestricted access to people, recommend alternatives to shallow or rushed opportunities, seek a diversity of viewpoints, and work to show unpopular or unnoticed points of view.
  4. Avoid political, civic and business involvements or other employment that compromise or give the appearance of compromising one’s own investigative independence.
  5. Strive to be unobtrusive and humble in dealing with people.
  6. Respect the integrity of the evidence and strive to preserve its authenticity.

Require by example and influence to maintain the spirit and high standards expressed in this code. When confronted with situations in which the proper action is not clear, seek the counsel of those who exhibit the highest standards of the profession. Reporters should continuously study their craft, techniques and the ethics that guide it.


Chapter # 32 SJC National Assembly for the National Government of the State of New Mexico

Chapter # 32 San Juan County National Assembly for the National Government,of the State of New Mexico shall convene tomorrow and Every Sunday May 19th at 8:00 pm utc-7 on Zoom room ID # 851-302-2600 or call 1-(408)-638-0968 or 1-646-558-8665 enter ID # 851-202-2600 Claim your nationality Department of State for the Government of The United States of America Expanding Trade for our people Home Contact The North American National Party Members International Notaries Entity DirectoryGenera…LikeLikeLoveHahaWowSadAngryComment


The Government of The United States of America

The Government of The United States of America-1781-2014 • The current affirmed American Nationals have a Government in place for people that want to claim a Nationality and get out of Stateless status. It is called the Government of The United States of America. The American National status is recognized and does have enforcement. Almost all aforementioned issues for the American National have been resolved. The Government of The United States of America-1781-2014 • If anyone is interested in taking an oath or affirmation to any state or to The United States of America, the only place that administers an oath or affirmation that has standing today is the Government of The United States of America. None of the states will issue an oath or affirmation because they are all operating by private membership associations. The Government of The United States of America-1781-2014 • If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the Secretary of State for The United States of America at: • or • Thank you for your time and attention.

American National Press Union- Code Of Ethics


The American National Press Union, a professional Union that promotes the highest standards in publication of record, filing of evidence, and performance of judicial investigations, acknowledges concern for every person’s need to be fully informed of the facts of any case.

Reporters operate as trustees of the Public. The primary objective is to conduct a thorough investigation to be published as a matter of Public Record.

This code is intended to promote the highest quality of reporting in all its forms and to strengthen public confidence in the profession. This code also serves as an educational tool for those who practice, and for those who appreciate, comprehensive reporting. To that end, The American National Press Union sets forth the following.

Code of Ethics

Reporters are accountable for upholding the following standards in their daily investigations:

  1. Be accurate and comprehensive in filing and reporting.
  2. Resist being manipulated by staged events, misrepresentations and false evidence.
  3. Be complete and provide context. Avoid stereotyping people. Maintain objectivity. Reporters communicate/present documented or verifiable facts and avoid presenting one’s own bias and opinions in the investigation.
  4. Treat all people with respect and dignity. Give special consideration to vulnerable victims and compassion to victims of crime or tragedy. Intrude when there is probable cause to believe that a crime is being committed or probable cause to believe that there is evidence of a crime to be filed and reported.
  5. Do not intentionally contribute to, alter, or seek to alter or influence evidence.
  6. Do not manipulate evidence (images, documents or audio) to enhance impact mislead the Public or misrepresent the facts.
  7. Do not pay or otherwise reward sources for evidence.
  8. Do not accept gifts, favors, or compensation from those that seek to influence the facts, alter evidence or conceal a crime.
  9. Do not intentionally sabotage the efforts of other reporters as they too, are trustees of the Public.
  10. As reports are the Public’s business and become part of the Public record, it is imperative that all evidence and claims are verified and all sources are cited accurately

Reporters are required to:

  1. Ensure that the Public’s business is conducted in an ethical manner and defend the rights of access for all reporters.
  2. Think proactively, as a student of psychology, sociology, politics and art to develop a unique vision and presentation. Work with a voracious appetite for justice.
  3. Strive for total and unrestricted access to people, recommend alternatives to shallow or rushed opportunities, seek a diversity of viewpoints, and work to show unpopular or unnoticed points of view.
  4. Avoid political, civic and business involvements or other employment that compromise or give the appearance of compromising one’s own investigative independence.
  5. Strive to be unobtrusive and humble in dealing with people.
  6. Respect the integrity of the evidence and strive to preserve its authenticity.

Require by example and influence to maintain the spirit and high standards expressed in this code. When confronted with situations in which the proper action is not clear, seek the counsel of those who exhibit the highest standards of the profession. Reporters should continuously study their craft, techniques and the ethics that guide it.


New Mexico Adopts the 7 Laws of Noah

Seven Laws of Noah for All Mankind

by John P. Pratt
12 Dec 2016, 1 Reed (SR)

©2016 by John P. Pratt. All rights Reserved.

Index, Home

1. The Hebrew Tradition
2. Biblical Support
2.1 Old Testament
2.2 New Testament
3. Code of Ur-Nammu
4. Problem With Blasphemy
5. Proposed Correction
6. Conclusion

The Hebrew tradition that God gave Noah seven laws for all mankind is supported both by the Bible and ancient laws. A proposed restoration of those laws is presented.

There is a Hebrew tradition that after the Great Flood when God covenanted with Noah, He also gave seven laws which were to obeyed by all of his posterity. That means they were to be obeyed by all mankind living today. That is an important enough claim that it seems worth researching to discover either the truth or falsehood of that assertion. If all of us are going to be judged by our obedience to those laws, it seems imperative to know what will be on our final test. This article first reviews the tradition and then support from the Bible and from ancient laws. Finally, after concluding that there is indeed compelling evidence that such laws existed, a composite list of what those original laws might have been is proposed.

1. The Hebrew Tradition

A new book attempts to bring this ancient Hebrew tradition to the notice of the Christian world. The book is entitled The Seven Laws of the Sons of Noah, by James Nollet (Oct 2016). Before reading that book this tradition was unknown to me, but it sparked enough interest to research the subject.

The Talmud preserves ancient oral traditions

The principal source for the existence of the seven laws given to Noah is the (Babylonian) Talmud. That ancient book, which is considered sacred to modern Orthodox Judaism, was an attempt to record the oral tradition of the Pharisees about AD 200 (the Mishnah), along with commentaries added until about AD 500 (the Gemara). It should be noted that those oral traditions were rejected by the Sadducees, a competing Hebrew religious sect at the time of Christ. Today some Hebrew sects do not accept it, so by no means is it considered as inspired even by all Hebrews[1], much less by almost any Christians. For the purposes of this article, the only reason the Talmud is being quoted at all is because it attempted to preserve ancient traditions, not because of any belief that it is an inspired work. Again, the subject is of enough importance that any chance that the tradition might be true is worth investigating.

The Talmud seems consistent in claiming that seven laws were given to Noah to be kept by all of his descendants (sometimes translated the “sons of Noah”). In this article those laws are called the “Seven Laws of Noah” or simply the “Seven Laws”. Different references in the Talmud disagree on exactly what those laws were, but all agree on the number being seven.

The following are the purported Seven Laws of Noah. The order of the laws differs in different references; indeed most sources on the Internet listed them in different order. The following order is from what appears to be the earliest listing.[2] Only the single words in boldface are listed in that reference; the explanations which follow are from other sources and commentaries.

      The Seven Laws

1. Courts. Have courts of law with which to administer justice. When one takes an oath to tell the truth as a witness, one may not break that oath.

2. Idolatry. Do not worship man-made images.

3. Blasphemy. Do not curse God nor use His name profanely.

4. Sexual Immorality. Do not commit adultery, incest, homosexuality, or bestiality.

5. Murder. Do not commit either homicide nor suicide.

6. Stealing. Do not steal anything which belongs to others.

7. Limb of a living animal. Do not take the limb from an animal while it lives and eat that limb. Variants of this commandment prohibit eating or drinking blood.

The Ten Commandments of Moses

The first thing one might notice is a great similarity to the Ten Commandments of Moses. That should not be surprising because each nation would be able to add more laws as long as those original seven stayed intact. For comparison here are the Ten Commandments:

      The Ten Commandments

1. No Other Gods. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

2. Idolatry. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or … bow down thyself to them.

3. Blasphemy. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.

4. Sabbath. Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy.

5. Parents. Honor thy father and thy mother.

6. Murder. Thou shalt not kill.

7. Adultery. Thou shalt not commit adultery.

8. Stealing. Thou shalt not steal.

9. Witnessing. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

10. Coveting. Thou shalt not covet. (Exo. 20:3-17)

Let’s compare the two lists. First, note that the first of the Seven Laws is essentially equivalent to the ninth of the Ten Commandments because both are about not lying as a witness (as in a court). If so, then we see that six of the Seven are included in the Ten. The main differences are that the Seven include a prohibition against consuming living blood and the Ten include some additional commandments.

Such similarities are to be expected because the Ten should be built on the foundation of the Seven, adding some new commandments which apply only to the descendants of Israel (Jacob). That is, after the Flood many of the descendants of Noah each founded new nations. Originally, nations were simply extended families. Each nation could enact its own laws as long as those laws stayed within the guidelines of those given to Noah for all mankind. In particular, the nation of Israel, born when the Lord through Moses delivered them from bondage in Egypt, was given the law of Moses. The Ten Commandments were a summary of that law, but were only intended to be binding on Israel. Thus we would expect the Ten Commandments to be an extension of any laws given to Noah.

As an example of a special commandment just for Israel, the sabbath (seventh) day helps Hebrews stand out as a nation and helps identify when they are being faithful in obeying the Lord. It was clearly not a commandment to all mankind. For Christians the weekly day of worship is to be Sunday, the first day of the week, in remembrance of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.[3]

As for the consuming of blood, even though such was not forbidden in the Ten Commandments, that prohibition was included elsewhere in the law of Moses: “No soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood” (Lev.17:12). Thus all of the traditional Seven Laws are included in the law of Moses.

2. Biblical Support

Now let us turn to other sources to see if there any reason to believe that seven laws were actually given to Noah. Let us begin with the Bible.

2.1 Old Testament

God covenanted with Noah for all his posterity
(by Joseph Anton Kock, 1803)

Two of these traditional Seven Laws are given right in the Book of Genesis as commandments to Noah right after the Flood. Moreover, it is implied that they are for both him and his descendants (“sons” Gen. 9:1). That is a strong witness that at least some laws were given. Now the question becomes how many laws were given and what were the others? If all seven were given in the Bible, there would be no need for this article.

One law given to Noah was “But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.” (Gen. 9:4) That is an exact match for one interpretation of the seventh of the Seven Laws. It is such an unusual and unexpected law that it is a strong witness that both that Biblical law and the Talmudic tradition have a common origin.

Another law recorded in the Bible that was given to Noah is “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man” (Gen. 9:6). This is not only an exact match with one of the Seven Laws as well as one of the Ten Commandments, it also specifies the penalty as being capital punishment. Thus, any country which has laws not requiring the death penalty for murder is breaking a law given by the Lord to Noah. This law is not dependent on Hebrew oral tradition, but is stated right in the Book of Genesis.

It should also be noted that there was another law given to Noah and his sons before either of those two commandments. It has apparently been entirely overlooked in research on this subject. The first law recorded in Genesis which was given to Noah after the Deluge was: “And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth” (Gen. 9:1). How can this commandment be omitted from the list when it was also given to Adam (Gen. 1:28)? Moreover, it is this verse wherein it is made clear that these commandments were intended for all of Noah’s posterity. Obviously, Noah and his three sons were not being commanded to repopulate the entire earth by themselves. This omitted law is discussed below in the section proposing a restored set of the Seven Laws.

Another more subtle argument favoring the existence of idolatry being one of the Seven Laws is the following. It has always been puzzling to me that the second of the Ten Commandments was even necessary. That is, if one follows the first commandment of not worshiping any other gods except the one true God who delivered Israel from the bondage of Egypt, then wouldn’t the second commandment not to worship idols be superfluous? It has always seemed that the first commandment subsumes the second if its intent was not to worship idols. The existence of the Seven Laws of Noah could help explain the reason for two separate commandments: the law forbidding idolatry was already one of the Seven, but with Moses a new commandment limiting worship even further was being added.

2.2 New Testament

The Roman centurion was not pagan, but “feared God”

One of the best scriptural evidences supporting the Seven Laws is in the book of Acts. There were disputes about whether a gentile being baptized into the newly founded Church of Christ needed to follow all of the law of Moses or not. At first the gospel was not even taught to gentiles until Peter had the vision that the time had come to teach Cornelius (Acts 10:28), the first gentile to be baptized. But what law should gentiles obey after baptism? The Apostle Paul maintained that it was not necessary for them to live the law of Moses, which was only for Israelites and in any case had been fulfilled in Christ. At the first official hearing where the issue was decided, James the Just (the brother of Christ and head of the Jerusalem Church, probably what would be called today the Presiding Bishop), finally decided in favor of Paul. He declared, “Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.” (Acts 15:19-20).

How did James go about deciding on that list of prohibitions? In his book, Nollet explains that to understand that ruling it helps to know that at that time there were two distinct types of converts to Judaism. The first was a full conversion which involved accepting circumcision and the entire law of Moses. The second type was simply to agree to live by the Seven Laws of Noah as then understood from the Talmud. Jews were to have no dealings at all with gentiles because they worshiped idols and many gods. If a Roman made the huge leap of faith to abandon the Roman gods to worship the one true God, then the Jews referred to that second type of convert as “God-fearing” (or as James said, “turned to God”). Jews could have interaction with God-fearing gentiles without being polluted. This must have been the case both with the Roman centurion Cornelius who “feared God” (Acts 10:1-2) as well as the centurion who not only had the faith to have Jesus heal his servant from afar but also had even built a synagogue for the Jews (Luke 7:5). James is apparently simply listing a few of the familiar laws of Noah as to what the requirements were to be a “God-fearing” gentile. If so, then his decision was that the rules for converting to Christianity could be basically the same as for that level of conversion to Judaism.

Thus, the Book of Acts provides evidence that the laws of Noah were known to the apostles of Jesus Christ and were considered to be authentic. That is a huge point of support for both the existence of such laws of Noah as well as their acceptance as having been accurately preserved by oral tradition.

3. Code of Ur-Nammu

If indeed seven laws for all mankind were revealed to Noah to be used for governing every nation, then some trace of those laws should be found in the most ancient laws known, especially if they trace back to near the time of Great Flood (2343 BC in my chronology).

Code of Ur-Nammu

The most ancient code of laws known in history is believed to be the Code of Ur-Nammu of ancient Sumer and to date back to about 2100 BC. If that is correct, that would only be a couple of hundred years after the Flood, so it totally seems worthy of investigation. After all, the survivors of a the Great Deluge would still have a vivid memory that nearly all of mankind were destroyed because of their wickedness, so one would expect new sets of laws to contain righteous principles. With that in mind, let’s look at the 32 laws of the Code of Ur-Nammu.[4]

The first law listed is: “If a man commits a murder, that man must be killed.” That one is a bull’s-eye. That is almost identical to the Genesis version: “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed” (Gen. 9:6). In any case it seems equivalent to the fifth of the Seven Laws of Moses: Do not murder. Remember, that comparison is not to Hebrew oral tradition, but the Bible itself. On the other hand, it is not surprising that murder is against the law, so let’s look at some other laws.

The second law is: “If a man commits a robbery, he will be killed”. In most of these translations, “robbery” and “stealing” are used interchangeably. The technicality that in English “robbery” is different from “stealing” because it implies force on the victim or the threat of force was apparently not understood by most translators. The third law concerns kidnapping which is treated separately from theft.

Laws 4 through 11 all concern marriage, divorce, and avoiding adultery. Some instances of adultery were actually punishable by death (laws 6 and 7), just at it was in the law of Moses, so those laws show how important marriage covenants were. Forbidding adultery is not only a match to the eighth of the Ten Commandments, it is close enough to the fourth of the traditional laws of Noah as to be counted as a match.

Moreover, because marriage is implied in the forgotten law of Noah to “multiply, and replenish the earth”, it is important to notice that some of the laws of Ur-Nammu deal with marriage. Thus, here we find evidence in support of marriage being considered in the official laws of the land as might be expected from what Noah was commanded.

Most of the other laws in the Code of Ur-Nammu deal with treatment of slaves and disputes between citizens. Apparently the laws covered both what we now call criminal and civil cases.

Law 28 is relevant to this study: “If a man appeared as a witness, and was shown to be a perjurer, he must pay fifteen shekels of silver”. That is a very close match to both the ninth of the Ten Commandments and the first of the traditional Hebrew laws of Noah. That makes four matches, which forms good supporting evidence that ancient laws might well have been shaped by the alleged Seven Laws of Noah. Of course, it is not surprising that there were laws against murder and theft, but to sometimes punish adultery with death and to prohibit only bearing false witness rather than lying in general[5] are both unusual enough to constitute compelling evidence that there is an actual connection between the two sets of laws. Limiting lying to false witness seems wise to indicate a high level of deception intended in order to be condemned of breaking this law. Besides applying to perjury in court, this law could also include publicly making false claims about a product being sold. Not forbidding all lying gets the husband off the hook for telling his wife the “little white lie” that she does not look fat in that dress!

The better known Code of Hammurabi, a king of the Old Babylonian Kingdom near the same area as Sumer, dates to about 1700 B.C. It had 232 laws which were similar to those of Ur-Nammu, but covered many more details of social actions, such as the wages to be paid to various trades. Details are not reviewed in this article as they do not add much new to this discussion, but the preface seems relevant as it attests to the desire of the king to please God and rule in righteousness:

“Anu and Bel called by name me, Hammurabi, the exalted prince, who feared God, to bring about the rule of righteousness in the land, to destroy the wicked and the evil-doers; so that the strong should not harm the weak; so that I should rule over the black-headed people like Shamash, and enlighten the land, to further the well-being of mankind.”[6]

4. Problem With Blasphemy

Notwithstanding good support of the existence of Noah’s Seven Laws and strong evidence of similarities found in ancient legal codes dating to that period, there appear to be problems with one of the laws given in the traditional Hebrew view. That is not surprising because they claim to have been preserved by an oral tradition. Anyone who has played the game of whispering a sentence around a circle of people in order to laugh at how much it gets changed is familiar with the possibility of details being altered or misunderstood. More than that, there is the possibility of some of the laws having been entirely lost. The most consistent part of the tradition, and one which would be easy to preserve, was that there were originally seven laws. Thus, if some were lost, then others would need to be invented to fill their slots to make a total of seven (representing completeness). Let us now look at some problems to see if remedies can be proposed.

The third of the traditional Hebrew laws which forbids blasphemy against God is problematic. If it were correct, then God would be brought into the laws of all nations. Do all nations even know about God? Let’s consider the implications of accepting this law.

What of belief in many gods?

Many religions are polytheistic, pagan, or even atheistic. Some countries are called the “heathen nations” in scripture. God doesn’t seem to have a problem with them because the judgment will be “tolerable” for them. In fact, they can rise in the first resurrection (D&C 45:54 cf D&C 75:22). Indeed, worshiping the one true God is only a requirement to enter the highest (celestial) kingdom of the three kingdoms of heaven. The heathen who died without law and were honorable men will inherit the second (terrestrial) kingdom (D&C 76:71-75). Thus, it does not seem possible that the original seven laws could have had any requirement to worship, nor even believe in, one true God.

The Ten Commandments require the worship of God for the children of Israel, but that is an example of adding a law for one particular nation. In the Book of Mormon, there is also another example of a law requiring worship of the Lord. New prophets can make new covenants with God which not only affect their descendants but also all of those who enter the land associated with the covenant. The Book of Mormon is largely the story of the descendants of a prophet named Lehi who was a descendant of Joseph of Egypt. His family left Jerusalem in 601 BC, just before its destruction later that year,[7] and were led by the Lord across the ocean to the Americas. Lehi made a covenant with the Lord which apparently concerns the entire western hemisphere. The law which came with his covenant to receive that land included at least two new laws above and beyond the laws of Noah. First, the inhabitants of the land, including those from the gentile nations who would eventually “discover” that land, must worship the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord has decreed that if any nation on this land ceases to be Christian, it will be swept off the face of the earth. In fact, that decree dated back to the civilization of the Jaredites who had dwelt in the land previous to Lehi, but had been destroyed (Ether 2:9).

Second, Lehi was given the law of monogamy (the marriage of one man to one woman) for all who lived in his land. The Lord told Lehi’s son Jacob that He was not at all pleased with what had happened in the case of Solomon with his 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:3 ) and He would not tolerate anyone using Solomon as an excuse to practice polygamy in this new land (Jacob 2:24-27). Jacob was told this was the law given to Lehi, although there could be exceptions if commanded by the Lord. The Lord also added that their enemies (the Lamanites), even though wicked in many ways, at least followed the law of monogamy and hence would be used by the Lord as a scourge to them.

This law of monogamy is noted here because it was clearly a departure from what had been allowed under the Seven Laws of Noah. There are prohibitions against adultery in all three sets of laws considered (Seven Laws, Ten Commandments, and Code of Ur-Nammu). That implies that some sort of marriage must be defined, but leaves it open as to multiple wives or husbands or concubines being lawful. The new law in the Americas was definitely more restrictive.

This is a great example of how new nations could have different laws from each other, even given by the Lord, but it would be understood that all would still fall within the restrictions of Noah’s Seven Laws. The main reason to include these examples from the Book of Mormon is to offer evidence that there was no requirement to believe in God nor prohibition of polygamy or concubines in the Seven Laws of Noah.

5. Proposed Correction

It seems worth an attempt to restore the original seven laws. We have seen that at least one has been omitted, that of multiplying to replenish the earth. Marriage is implied in all three lists of laws considered in this article because all of them prohibit adultery, which is the breaking of a marriage covenant. Thus it seems that one missing commandment might well have discussed marriage and having offspring.

Moreover, it has been argued above that there seems to be no reason to require that all mankind worship the god of Abraham. That was a special commandment for his posterity. Thus, the commandment not to blaspheme the name of God seems out of place for the many nations who had never even heard of God.

An important point here is the beauty and importance of negative laws. People often complain about the “Thou shalt not” commandments because they restrict freedom. But another way to look at it is they allow everything else except the one thing that is forbidden. Consider the example of all of the fruit in the Garden of Eden being available for Adam and Eve except for just one tree which was forbidden (Gen. 2:16-17).

Blind men describing an elephant
(Click to see their view of reality)

As another example, consider religion. If the commandment were to “Worship the one true God”, then all religions which did not claim to do that would be outlawed. On the other hand, if the commandment is “Thou shalt not worship man-made images” then a multitude of religions are allowed, even atheism. The Lord has said that He reveals His word to every nation and they have written it (2 Nephi 29:12). Think about that! That sounds like sacred books such as the Chinese Tao Te Ching, the Hindu Upanishads,[8] and the Tibetan Book of the Deadmight all have been inspired for particular peoples. Some religions speak of many gods, others speak of reincarnation and a law of “karma”. Some speak only of being “in tune” with nature and the “spirit-which-moves-in-all-things”. Perhaps God revealed different truths to various nations which could appear to be quite diverse from each other, even as when the blind men tried to describe the elephant. Each only touched one part of the elephant and thought he had the whole truth, but actually only understood part of the picture. All of those religions could be allowed by the Seven Laws as long as adherents did not bow down to man-made images. Abraham fought against idol worship before making his covenant with the Lord (Jasher 11:17), so apparently idolatry was forbidden as part of a law which predated God’s covenant with Abraham.

As another example, Taoists claim to follow “The Way”, the true path of life. When Christ came, he announced “I am the way” (John 14:6). All men are born with the light of Christ (John 1:9). So in a sense, any man following his conscience, the light within him, is following Christ, but without necessarily knowing His name. That could be a religion which would lead men to lead honorable lives. Clearly, it should not be a law for all nations to have to know of God and worship Him.

With all of that in mind, just changing one of the traditional Hebrew list of the Seven Laws of Noah results in what appears to possibly be an acceptable suggestion to be the original list. That is simply to replace the prohibition on blasphemy with the Biblical commandment to multiply and replenish the earth:

      Proposed Original Seven Laws

1. Idolatry. Do not worship man-made images.

2. Families. Encourage marriage for raising offspring.

3. Adultery. Do not commit adultery.

4. Blood. Do not eat nor drink blood.5. Stealing. Do not steal.

6. Murder. Do not murder. He who sheds innocent blood shall be executed.

7. Witnessing. Do not bear false witness.

If we count witnessing the same as courts, adultery the same as illicit intercourse, and consuming blood the same as eating a limb torn off a living animal, then six of these seven match up with the traditional Hebrew list. Only the prohibition of blasphemy has been removed for reasons discussed above. It was replaced with the one to marry and multiply and replenish the earth, which in fact was in the list provided in the Bible.

Seven Laws of Noah
Proposed original Seven Laws of Noah

Moreover, comparing this list to the Ten Commandments, we see that of the Ten, the ones about no other gods, blasphemy, honoring parents, the sabbath day, and coveting are not represented. That means then five of the Ten Commandments are among the final proposed Seven Laws.

As for the proposed order of the Seven Laws, note that commandments 2, 4, 6 are the three commandments listed in Genesis, kept in the same order. Moreover, commandments 1, 3, 5, and 7 are all included in the Ten Commandments in that same order. In addition, sacred symbolism of the numbers is retained: 1 is about worshiping God; 2 is about marriage (of two people), 3 is about a third person outside of marriage, 4 is about life, and 6 is about murder. In most of the sacred calendars, the number 6 represents death. The prohibition of murdering is also the sixth of the Ten Commandments. Thus, the order of these proposed commandments seems to be correct, or at least meaningful.

6. Conclusion

The evidence is compelling that there were indeed seven laws given to Noah after the Great Deluge to be observed by all nations which sprang up among his descendants. Several of the seven laws traditionally accepted by Judaism coincide with laws of the Ten Commandments and also from the Code of Ur-Nammu, which are the oldest laws known in history dating back to just a few hundred years after the Flood. Examination of the traditional laws shows both that one that is recorded in Genesis has been omitted and that one was added which does not seem possible to be correct. Thus, simply replacing the incorrect one (blasphemy) with the missing one (multiply and replenish the earth) produces a proposed list for the original Seven Laws of Noah given for all mankind as commandments from God.


  1. See “Talmud” in Wikipedia for a summary article about the Talmud and its acceptance in modern Judaism.
  2. This listing is from the Tosefta (Avodah Zarah 9:4) in the Mishnah (oral tradition) in the Talmud. (See “Seven Laws of Noah” in Wikipedia in the Tosefta section.) Another Mishnah source is Sanhedrin 56a (see “Sanhedrin 56, Section 3) “The Seven Mitzvos (Laws) of Benei (the Descendants of) Noach (Noah)“. That source is apparently quoting the earlier Tosefta (see footnote 18 in Wikipedia opcit); those two sources only differ in the order of the second and third commandments, idolatry and blasphemy. See other summary articles: “Noahide Laws“, Section: “The Seven Laws”; The Jewish Encyclopedia “Laws, Noachian“; and The Jewish Virtual Library, “The Seven Noachide Laws“.
  3. Pratt, John P., “Sacred Calendars Support Christian Worship on Sunday” (18 Sep 2016), Section 2 “Traditional Support for Sunday”.
  4. See “Code of Ur-Nammu” in Wikipedia for a summary article of the code. One translation of all 32 of the laws is provided there which is the translation used in this article.
  5. The version of this law given by the Lord to the LDS people was simply “Thou shalt not lie; he that lieth and will not repent shall be cast out” (D&C 42:21).
  6. Hooker, Richard, editor; King, L.W. translator Mesopotamia: The Code of Hammurabi (1996) quoted in Wikipedia at “Code of Hammurabi“.
  7. Pratt, John P., “Lehi’s 600-year Prophecy of the Birth of Christ” Meridian Magazine (31 Mar 2000).
  8. Pratt, John P., “Parallels Between Hindu and Mormon Scripture” (30 Oct 1967). This is a paper submitted to a World Religion class at the U. of U. just after my LDS mission.