You misunderstand the reason for my saying "potentially". I was hesitant to assume that a biological descendant of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and a biological descendant of a Jew "who stood at Sinai and received the Torah" would automatically and necessarily be able to please Hashem solely on the basis of their biological descent from the right kind of humans. If you want to speak for Hashem, knock yourself out, but I'm not going to. My choice of words stand.
Again, the biology is not the issue. According to the Torah a person who is born into a Jewish family is supposed to keep the mitzvoth that came from Mount Sinai. The reason is because there are mitzvoth that require their parents, grandparents, other family, community leaders, community, etc. are supposed to raise them that way. Further, at Mouunt Sinai the generation that was there accepted it for themselves and future generations of children.
That is why I say "just is." Because for a Jew doing the mitzvoth given by Hashem is the default. Even, if a Jewish chooses to opt out and even if their parents didn't raise them that way. If they didn't make them choice for themselves to not keep the Torah, the Torah provides a system for Jews who keep the Torah to try and help lost Jews return to what they are supposed to be doing by default. If they chose to opt out the Torah provides methods for them to correct that choice if that is what they want to do.
According to the Torah, this is the behaviour on a national and person level that Hashem stated is pleasing to him for the Israeli/Jewish people.
This isn't me, speaking for Hashem, these things are in the Torah so essentially this is what Hashem said not me. It could be that we have two different views on what pleases Hashem and what Hashem stated is pleasing.
The opposite of "must be" is "cannot be", not "just is".
Not opposite of the statement "must be." A correction to the entire statement,
"The "potentially acceptable" Jew must be a biological descendant of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob."
Israelis/Jews as a nation and as individuals doing the mitzvoth of Hashem is both pleasing to Hashem and brings about the good that Hashem put in place for doing such.
Uhhh, ... being a Geir Tzedeq "because they have gone before a Torah based court ..." is the kind of stuff that I assumed "being a bona fide convert" involves. I wasn't suggesting that "standing at Sinai" or "having a guardian angel who stood at Sinai" makes a person a "bona fide convert". Gettting a guardian angel who stood at Sinai on your behalf" is, IMO, a benefit of conversion, not a necessary condition in becoming a convert.
What I am correcting is the concept of "angels" that operate in the way you are mentioning.
Even the western concept of an angel is not something that considered correct. The definitions of a Geir Tzedeq make no connection to receiving a guardian angel or any angels to begin with. Thus, I am trying seperate ideas that have nothing to do what a Geir Tzedeq is or even what they receive by being a Jew. "THE" benefit of the conversion is that they are
"doing the mitzvoth of Hashem, given to the Israeli/Jewish people just a born Israeli/Jew is defaulted to do, and thus is both pleasing to Hashem and brings about the good that Hashem put in place for a born Israeli/Jew who is doing such." Angels are not a part of the equation. Especially since one would need to first understand if the word and concept of the English term angel is even applicable to what a (מלאך) is in Hebrew.
Interesting, but irrelevant: Equally trivial and irrelevant is the fact that to "be a Christian" here in RF, one merely needs to claim to be, consequently there are some remarkably oddball folks who claim to be Christian or to have been a Christian simply on the basis of the fact that they went to a Christian Church a couple of times, or "were born Christian", and left the Church.
It is relevent because of the biological question asked earlier. In terms of how Christianity manages itself - that isn't relevant because Christians manage their religion in a way that is not connected to anything in the Torah and Halakha.
Okay, ... so is anyone a Toshav who simply claims to be a Toshav, or is there a process or ritual that a Toshav is obliged to undergo in order to get independent certification of their Toshav-ness?
No, according to the Rambam a Toshav must go before a Torah court in the land of Israel during the time when there is a Torah based nation in the land of Israel to be considered a Toshav which is only accepted during the Jubilee years. Which happens every 50 years.
When they go before the court they have to be found to accept and hold by the Noachide laws. Just like a normal court the 3 Torah based judges can question them and investigate them on what they hold by and do to determine if they can be accepted as a Toshav. If they are accepted they must observe Noachide laws and Israelis/Jews must treat them with the respect and protection the Torah requires. This is all while they are in the land of Israel. If they leave Israel, Jews have no requirement to follow up on them or enforce the Noachide laws on them.
So, where it is written that: "in the case of gentiles, who did not stand at Mount Sinai and receive the Torah, their contamination has not ended", the Talmud doesn't actually mean that the zohamma of only those who stood at Sinai and received the Torah ceased." I suppose that that will be of comfort to the Noachides regardless what non-Noachide non-Jews believe.
What the midrash is getting at is that Mount Sinai, the people who were there (Jewish and not Jewish) made a choice to accept the Torah and thus break the cycle of Avodah Zara that people had been creating and doing with no check against it in place. Avraham had started this process but it is like saying that the giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai sealed it. Thus, even the influence of the event started the process of ending Avodah Zara which several decreased with the spread of certain Tanakh based ideals that have spread abot the world - even by groups who were not fully keeping the Noachide laws correctly.
You also have to remember that the Talmud was written during a time when Avodah Zara, as a choice and the practice of it, was more widespread. Since that time there has been a lot of moving of the world away from many, but not all, of the types of Avodah Zara of that time. The Rambam, who lived a bit after the time of the Talmud states that even though Christinaity and Islam are not fully following Noachide laws in one way or the other they "at least" got the word out about the Tanakh about Hashem - so when their is a return of the Torah based sytem in the land of Israel it will make it easier for the world to turn towards the Noachide laws because they will at least of a idea of what they are - even if they don't initially fully understand them.
So, as you seem to suggest, Hashem has never ever suggested, much less said, that one person's sin can be imputed to another person. Can one person's merit be imputed to another person?
Right. According to the Torah each person is responsible or in some cases guilty for their own choices, mistakes, transgressions, etc. YET, said choices, mistakes, transgressions, etc. can effect the standard of living of others and the concepts that others grow up with and develop.
For example, if a person's father is a theif - they are not responsible for their father being a theif. They can be effected by the results of their father's actions (such as the stigma from society because of the pain and suffering their father caused, or family shame over the father's actions) but they are not responsible for them. Yet, if their father is a theif and they learned to be one too from their father and they go out and continue the lifestyle of their father, then their choice to do so is what they are responsible for. They can choose to break the cycle of what their father taught them, they choose to accept it and take it on, or even advance and become worse than their father. I.e. kind of a like the family business.
