Judaism doesn't have a notion of "being saved". What we know is what is required of a righteous gentile. The Rambam (one of the greatest codifiers of Jewish law) writes explicitly (Mishne Torah Hilchot Melachim 8:11) that
Anyone who accepts upon himself and carefully observes the Seven
Commandments is of the Righteous of the Nations of the World and has ...
Bavli AZ 6b
מנין שלא יושיט אדם כוס של יין לנזיר ואבר מן החי לבני נח ת"ל ולפני עור לא תתן מכשול
Whence [do we know that] a man shouldn't pass a cup of wine to a Nazir nor a limb-from-a-live-animal to a gentile? The verse states: And before a blind person do not place a stumbling block.
Your question seems to be predicated on understanding Bereishit 9:4
אַךְ־בָּשָׂ֕ר בְּנַפְשׁ֥וֹ דָמ֖וֹ לֹ֥א תֹאכֵֽלוּ׃
You must not, however, eat flesh with its life-blood in it.
as a prohibition for Noahides to eat blood.
However, Jewish tradition understands this verse differently. Rambam writes in Hilchot Melachim 9:1:
הוֹסִיף לְנֹחַ ...
God expects Jews to follow the torah and gentiles to follow the Noachide laws. Until you've converted you're still a gentile and don't have additional heavenly obligations.
Perhaps you have heard of people in the process of conversion being required to do more. If so, it's likely a misunderstanding. Once you are studying with a rabbi he will guide you to ...
The Mishneh Torah rules:
The prohibition applies to a limb or flesh that is separated from either a domesticated animal or a beast. However, it appears to me that a gentile is not executed for eating a limb taken from a living bird. ( Melachim uMilchamot 9:11)
Though the Rava'ad (see Moznaim ibid) disagrees, he exempts a sheretz
(creeping creature), ...
Yes there are many differences.
Jews are allowed to eat pieces taken from the animal immediately after shechita is performed, even while the animal is still moving
מפרכס (blood must still be removed -- which is harder to do compared
to regular meat, because it was taken alive-ish). Shechita kills the
animal, even if it is still convulsing. (Simla Chadasha
The source for these laws is traditional from Chazal, and they explicitly list them in Sanhedrin 56a:
תנו רבנן שבע מצות נצטוו בני נח דינין וברכת השם ע"ז גילוי עריות ושפיכות דמים וגזל ואבר מן החי
Translation: Our Rabbis taught: seven precepts were the sons of Noah commanded: social laws; to refrain from blasphemy, idolatry; adultery; bloodshed; robbery; ...
This is a great question, which is debated by two of the great Acharonim. The gemara in Sanhedrin 74b considers that specific details of Jewish law might apply to Bnei Noach when they intersect with their mitzvot, since they are included in the "associated rules" (avizrayhu) of those mitzvot. (The specific example there is not relevant to us.)
There are ...
As far as I'm aware, just about every posek assumes that all nations are obligated to believe in God in some way or another. This is stated explicitly by Rav Shmuel ben Hofni Gaon (commentary to Beraishis 34:12), Rabbeinu Nissim Gaon (intro to Talmud), probably the opinion of the Sefer Hachinuch (commandment 417, and Minchas Chinuch there), Maharal (Gevuros ...
Basing himself on Maimonides' ruling in Hilkhot Melakhim (8:10), "וכן צוה משה רבינו מפי הגבורה לכוף את כל באי העולם לקבל מצות שנצטוו בני נח" , the Lubavitcher Rebbe argued that it is incumbent upon each Jew to persuade the gentiles into observance of the seven Noahide laws. See Ha-Pardes vol. 59:9 (1985), pp. 7-11. Michael J. Broyde, “The Obligation of Jews ...
According to this source, there is no source:
No discussion of Jewish attitudes toward Aristotle can be complete
(not that this essay aspires to completeness in any event) without
mention of the infamous, scurrilous "Rabbitstotle" legend of the great
philosopher being caught devouring a live rabbit, and responding to
his surprised observer that &...
Writing as a ben Noach, there is no definitive answer on what we do; only what we can't do(save setting up a court). Bnei Noach can do whatever they want as long as they don't transgress the seven. Brit Noach is a covenant of wild freedom, basically. For the details of the seven, I go by the Rambam, Hilchot Melachim Ch. 8-10.
Since Brit Noach allows so much ...
The Mishneh Torah, in Hilkhot Melakhim u-Milchamot 10:6-7[4-5], says:
ו [ד] בן נוח שבירך את השם, או שעבד עבודה זרה, או שבא על אשת חברו, או שהרג חברו, ונתגייר--פטור. הרג בן ישראל, או שבא על אשת ישראל, ונתגייר--חייב; והורגין אותו על בן ישראל, וחונקין אותו על אשת ישראל שבעל--שהרי נשתנה דינו.
ז [ה] כבר ביארנו שכל מיתת בני נוח בסיף--אלא אם כן בעל אשת ישראל ...
R. Shmuel ben Hofni Gaon lists the 30 mitzvot as follows:
א. עבודה זרה
ב. ברכת השם
ג. יחוד השם
ה. שבועת שקר
ו. הריגת אדם את עצמו
ז. הריגת אדם את זולתו
ח. אשת איש
ט. עריכת נשואין על ידי מוהר ומתן
יא. משכב זכור
יב. הרבעת בהמה
טו. אבר מן החי החי
טז. דם מן החי
יז. איסור כלאים בבהמות
יח. חסר מכתב היד
There are a number of Rabbis, mostly Chabad, involved in teaching Bnei Noach and answering their halachic questions. One of the more prominent ones is Rabbi Yaakov Rogalsky, co-author of Path of the Righteous Gentile. Another is Rabbi Chaim Richman.
Your first question should be asked of somone who is an expert in animal slaughter such as the OU or the STAR-K (Baltimore Vaad Hakashrus) who can tell you if the 'humane' practices required by the FDA ensure that the meat is not 'living' when it is being cut up originally. It could be a matter of how long after the slaughter they wait to actually cut it ...
See R. Yehuda Halevi's Kuzari (3:73) where he writes:
The Rabbi: Let us rather assume two other possibilities. Either they employ secret methods of interpretation which we are unable to
discern, and which were handed down to them, together with the method
of the 'Thirteen Rules of Interpretation,' or they use Biblical verses
as a kind of fulcrum of ...
According to the Sdei Chemed, this question dates back to the Pri Megadim (Yoreh Deah 62) who has a safek about whether bittul helps for ever min ha-chai to a ben noach. Subsequently, this became a popular topic of debate, and the Sdei Chemed records many acharonim on each side of the issue.
The Chazon Ish (Y.D. 62:20) writes that in all likelihood, Noahides are commanded against heresy, because belief in God is the foundation for all 7 commandments that they are actually commanded in. However, he himself is unsure whether this heresy is defined in the same way as it would be for a Jew, considering that there are some authorities who permit ...
In Noahide law, ignorance is no excuse (this, by the way, is true in secular law as well). The reason for this is, as the Rambam says (Hil. Melakhim, 10:1), היה לו ללמוד ולא למד--he should have learnt the law and he did not learn it:
אבל אם ידע שהוא אשת חבירו ולא ידע שהיא אסורה עליו. אלא עלה על לבו שדבר זה מותר לו. וכן אם הרג והוא לא ידע שאסור להרוג. הרי ...
The Lechem Mishna to the Rambam Hilchos Melachim 10:9 says that the fact that a non-Jew is not allowed to keep Shabbos or learn Torah is, in fact, a Rabbinic prohibition.
So according to that, there are in fact Rabbinic enactments that apply to non-Jews, but perhaps it is only, like those two, where specified.
Let me respond as a convert and someone who has seen a few things that might be relevant to explaining the situation.
First of all, most synagogues I've attended are fine with visitors who are not Jewish, but some synagogues have had unfortunate experiences that may have colored their view. For example, when I was in college, I went to services at the ...
There is a dispute of the Rishonim as to whether or not daughter in law is a relationship prohibited to Noahides (Ramban vs. Rashba). The Ramban (to Yevamos 98a) holds that Noahides have no prohibition of relationships with relatives who are not blood relatives. He brings a proof to this from the fact that Yehuda absolved Tamar upon discovering her ...
All rishonim agree that if it is real aver min hachai (it is included in the Torah prohibition) than it is absolutely forbidden to give to a non-Jew.
If it is only a rabbinical prohibition, there is a major dispute in the rishonim and poskim. See רשב״א חולין נז ע״א ד״ה ה״ג, ר״ן שם, ועי׳ ש״ך סי׳ נה ס״ק יא, who permit when it's only a rabbinical prohibition. ...
The new covenant replaced the old one. The reason the Jews keep the 7 Noachide laws is not because of the commandments to their pre-Mosaic ancestors, but because of the covenant at Sinai. In fact, according to Maimonides' Laws of Kings and their Wars 8:14 this is arguably also the reason why gentiles post-Sinai are still obligated in their 7 commandments.
According to Rambam (Hilkhot Milah 3:7), not only is it permissible for a gentile to circumcise himself, it is a mitsvah!
As he writes in a responsum (ed. Blau # 148), this is in the category of eino metsuveh v'oseh; one who performs a mitsvah in which he is not obligated:
מותר לישראל למול הגוי אם רוצה הגוי לכרות הערלה ולהסירה, לפי שכל מצוה, שהגוי עושה, ...