04-07-2016, 09:07 AM
The concept of an actual "Noahide Court" is one that is empowered by the society at large to try, convict and punish Gentile transgressors of capital sins within the Seven Noahide Commandments. The capital sin of first and foremost priority to be under the jurisdiction of an actual Noahide Court, or a system of Noahide Courts, is the sin of murder, since that is the only one for which punishment by a Noahide Court is mentioned in an explicit verse in the Torah (Genesis 9:6): "Whoever sheds the blood of man, among [a court of] man, his blood shall be shed..." This refers to a Noahide commandment to judge and penalize a murderer.
I don't know of any nominally stable society in which the established ruling court system is willing to turn its authority for judging felony crimes (including murder) over to free-lance or vigilante courts. What you're describing, rather than being an actual empowered court (which must include enforcement officers such as policemen), would be:
(a) a free-choice agreement between individuals, who are contesting about civil matters, to submit to a binding arbitration based on some agreed-upon ground rules (e.g., from the Noahide Code). To set that up in a way that would be enforceable by the society's ruling court system, you should consult with an attorney who is expert in the society's civil laws governing arbitration, and contracts to be bound by arbitration.
(b) a free-choice agreement among a group of people, that they will act in a certain way (while being careful not to break any of the laws of the society at large) towards a person who is not following a certain set of conditions (e.g., from the Noahide Code) that the group has stipulated.
Both of the above options seem to be very plausible to done within a society that allows for freedom of legal actions and individual liberties.
I don't know of any nominally stable society in which the established ruling court system is willing to turn its authority for judging felony crimes (including murder) over to free-lance or vigilante courts. What you're describing, rather than being an actual empowered court (which must include enforcement officers such as policemen), would be:
(a) a free-choice agreement between individuals, who are contesting about civil matters, to submit to a binding arbitration based on some agreed-upon ground rules (e.g., from the Noahide Code). To set that up in a way that would be enforceable by the society's ruling court system, you should consult with an attorney who is expert in the society's civil laws governing arbitration, and contracts to be bound by arbitration.
(b) a free-choice agreement among a group of people, that they will act in a certain way (while being careful not to break any of the laws of the society at large) towards a person who is not following a certain set of conditions (e.g., from the Noahide Code) that the group has stipulated.
Both of the above options seem to be very plausible to done within a society that allows for freedom of legal actions and individual liberties.