In my opinion, the laws that the Noahids were to promulgate according to their seven commandments were not only to establish courts in each city, but also to be commanded concerning theft, abuse, usury, labor relations, damages, loans, business, etc., just as Israel was ordered to legislate on these matters (Nahmanides, commentary on Genesis 34:13). Maimonides` approach, however, is highly controversial among classical commentators. Some interpreters of Maimonides argued that he wanted to force the Jewish court, but not individual Jews, to force non-Jews to obey the Noahid laws. Others have argued that the whole issue is irrelevant until the time of the Messiah. Yet it seems clear that Maimonides intended that, whenever possible to enforce conformity, the Jews would make an effort to do so. Some of the “God-fearing” became proselytes (the original definition of this word was that Gentiles had to follow Jewish laws, avoid all false gods). Other medieval authorities, instead of trying to reinterpret Maimonides` statement, simply disagreed. Rabbi Abraham ibn Daud clearly rejects any obligation to uphold the Noahid laws, even in a situation where Jews subjugated non-Jews in the war. This also seems to be the opinion of Rashi, Tosafot, Nahmanides and Rashba.
In treating individual non-Jews as employees or slaves, none of the law books, with the exception of Maimonides, mention the obligation to impose Noahide laws or punish non-Jews for violations of Noahide laws. According to Acts 13:14, 17, 18 […], Paul began to work along the traditional Jewish line of proselytizing in the various synagogues where the door proselytes [e.g., Exodus 20:9] and the Jews met; and it was only because he failed to win the Jews to his views, and met with strong resistance and persecution on their part, that he turned to the world of the Gentiles, having agreed at a council with the apostles at Jerusalem to receive the Gentiles into the church only as proselytes of the door, that is, after they had accepted the Noacian laws (Acts 15:1-31). [81] The association of these laws with Adam implies that they were established as part of the creation of the natural world. Jewish law discusses how and when humanity became aware of the Noahide commandments and whether these obligations are exclusively moral or also include theological obligations. The normative Talmudic opinion (Sanhedrin 56a-57a) guides the commandments of Genesis 2:16, but the generality of the verse and the conflicting opinions citing other texts suggest that this text is probably only a posteriori support for the concept. There is no explicit universal revelation of these commandments in the Bible, and some Jewish thinkers have claimed that they are derived from reason or natural law. Maimonides claims that six of the prohibitions were given to Adam, and after the flood, Noah was given the additional obligation not to eat blood or limbs of a living animal. This seventh obligation represents a restriction on the slaughter of animals for food, a licence that was first granted after the flood. According to the Talmud, the Noahide laws apply to all mankind.
[2] [6] [14] In Judaism, the term B`nei Noah (Hebrew: בני נח, “son of Noah”)[13] refers to all mankind. [6] The Talmud also says, “The righteous of all nations have a share in the world to come.” [27] Every non-Jew who lives according to these laws is considered one of the righteous among the Gentiles. [14] According to the Talmud, the seven laws were given first to Adam and later to Noah. [1] [2] [6] [14] Six of the seven laws were derived exegetically from passages in the book of Genesis,[1][5][6][14] the seventh being the establishment of the courts. [1] [5] [6] [14] The overlap of five of the seven laws enumerated for Noahides suggests that they could be understood as a kind of universal and natural morality. This is how some modern philosophers like Hermann Cohen understood them. In the history of Christianity, the apostolic decree recorded in Acts 15 is commonly considered a parallel to the seven laws of Noah. [2] [78] [79] Modern scholars, however, dispute the connection between Acts 15 and the Noahid laws. [79] The apostolic decree is still respected by the Orthodox Church and contains certain dietary restrictions. [80] Different rabbinic sources have different positions on how the seven laws should be divided into categories. Maimonides included tree grafting in his Mishneh Torah. [39] Like the Talmud, it interpreted the prohibition of homicide to include the prohibition of abortion.
[44] [45] David ben Solomon ibn Abi Zimra, a commentator on Maimonides, expressed surprise at omitting castration and witchcraft, which were also listed in the Talmud. [46] The Talmudist Ulla said that there are 30 laws here that the sons of Noah took upon themselves. However, he lists only three, namely the three that pagans follow: not creating a ketubah between men, not selling carrion or human flesh in the market, and respecting the Torah. Other laws are not listed. [47] Although the authorities seem to assume that Ulla`s thirty commandments contained the original seven, thirty other laws are possible from reading. There are two different lists of the 30 laws. Both lists contain twenty-three other mitzvot, which are subdivisions or extensions of the seven laws. One of the 16th century work Asarah Maamarot by Rabbi Menachem Azariah da Fano, and a second from the 10th century Samuel ben Hofni, recently published from his Judeo-Arabic writings after being found in the Cairo Geniza. [48] [49] Rabbi Zvi Hirsch Chajes suggests that the enumerated commandments of Menachem Azariah of Fano are not related to the first seven or are based on Scripture, but rather were transmitted through oral tradition. [50] Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, repeatedly published and spoke about the Seven Laws of Noah.