The old paths, or the Talmud tested by Scripture: Being a comparison of the principles and doctrines of modern Judaism with the religion of Moses and the prophetsMcCaul, Alexander
Religion
The old paths, or the Talmud tested by Scripture: Being a comparison of the principles and doctrines of modern Judaism with the religion of Moses and the prophets
McCaul, Alexander
Judaism -- Works to 1900
years, for in Numbers xiv. 33, it is said, “And your children ובניכם
(literally your sons, and, therefore, according to Talmudic logic, not
your daughters) shall wander in the wilderness forty years.” The same
logic will also prove that during the three days of miraculous darkness
in Egypt, the women of Israel were left in darkness as well as the
Egyptians, for it is said all the children of Israel (ולכל בני ישראל,
literally the sons of Israel) had light in their dwellings. And thus
also it might be proved that not one of the ten commandments is binding
upon the women, for the masculine gender is employed throughout. This
logic, therefore, is evidently false; and we conclude, on the contrary,
that as the women are included in all these passages—as they wandered
through the wilderness, and had light in their dwellings—and are bound
to keep the ten commandments as well as the men, so also they are
included in the command, “Ye shall teach them your children,” and that,
therefore, the command of the oral law not to teach women, is contrary
to the Word of God. But we are not confined to argument, God has plainly
commanded that the women should learn as well as the men. “And Moses
commanded them, saying, At the end of every seven years, in the
solemnity of the year of release in the Feast of Tabernacles, when all
Israel is come to appear before the Lord thy God in the place which he
shall choose, thou shalt read this law before all Israel in their
hearing. Gather the people together, men _and women_, and children, and
thy stranger that is within thy gates, that they may hear, and _that
they may learn_ ולמען ילמדו, and fear the Lord your God, and observe to
do all the words of this law.” (Deut. xxxi. 10-12.) Here a most
beautiful order is observed, and required of women as well as men;
hearing—learning—fearing—keeping the words of the law—God wills that
that women should fear him and keep his commandments as well as the men;
and therefore he wills that they should make use of the same means, that
they should hear, and learn all the words of the law. The traditionists
have, therefore, in this case plainly made void the law of God. God
commands women as well as men to learn the law; the Rabbies say they are
exempt from this duty. God commands that the woman should be taught. It
is plain, therefore, that the oral law, which contradicts the written
law, cannot be from God. The command of God is so plain that it is
unnecessary to enter deeply into the second Rabbinical reason for the
prohibition to teach women the law. It is evident that God did not think
that the poverty of their understanding was any obstacle to their
learning his will. Indeed it has pleased Him to show that He is no
respecter of persons with regard to male or female, more than with
regard to rich or poor. He has not only given them his law, but
conferred on women as well as men the gift of prophecy, so that the
names of Deborah, Hannah, and Huldah, must ever be remembered amongst
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account