[b-hebrew] oral law

Karl Randolph kwrandolph at email.com
Sun Jun 25 12:19:14 EDT 2006


Not all agree that to "bind them as a sign upon your 
hands" refers to a physical object, rather that the 
meaning of the words should be a guide to actions, 
and likewise "blinders upon your eyes" says that love 
for God will restrain your eyes from regarding that 
which is displeasing to God.

This interpretation is an action rather than object 
based understanding of the verse, giving a reason 
that the particulars of Tefillin were not given was 
because Tefillin were not mean in the passage. 
Which raises the question, when were Tefillin 

Karl W. Randolph.

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Shoshanna Walker" <rosewalk at concentric.net>
> You can't completely separate theology from the Torah.  I am looking
> at the Hebrew in this verse.  You can slaughter the animals as I have
> commanded.  Where else in the Torah text did G-d command the details
> of how exactly to slaughter?
> Another example is Tefillin.  The written text tells us which texts
> to put into the Tefillin, but it doesn't tell us how to make them,
> how to tie them, and more.
> > But when G-d gives a commandment in the written text and then 
> > writes that it should be performed "as I commanded", and the 
> > details are not written in the written Torah, don't you agree 
> > that G-d had to have commanded it somewhere else (as He says), 
> > besides in the written text?
> >
> >
> Does "as I commanded" actually mean "in the detailed way which I have
> commanded", and not just something like "because I have commanded
> this"? I would need to look at some specific examples to see if the
> Hebrew actually demands a reference to some other commandment rather
> than a self-reference in the commandment. Perhaps this way we can get
> back to Hebrew rather than theology!
> >
> >

Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list