Skip to main content
5 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Nov 1, 2016 at 13:32 comment added conceptualinertia Thank you for your answer. I think that the "not-universal" side has the better argument overall. I am bothered, however, by the different terms to mean the same thing. What is the difference between רֵעֲךָ֖ and אָחִ֖יךָ or בְּנֵ֣י עַמֶּ֔ךָ?
Nov 1, 2016 at 2:05 comment added Dick Harfield @conceptualinertia Thank you for your feedback. This was the first time I had come across this definition of the word אָֽהַבְתָּ֥, and accept that Malamat may be in error. I have therefore removed that reference. I have, however, found a number of scholars who regard the instruction to love one's neighbour, as found in the Decalogue (and therefore by association in Lev. 19) not to be universal. To support my original reference from Holt, I have added a detailed explanation from Vogt.
Nov 1, 2016 at 1:58 history edited Dick Harfield CC BY-SA 3.0
Feedback
Oct 31, 2016 at 21:45 comment added conceptualinertia A couple of points: 1) I don't buy that אָֽהַבְתָּ֥ doesn't mean love in the traditional affection sense. It is clearly used to mean affection (and not acting beneficial) in many places. E.g. Genesis 22:2, 24:67, 29:18, etc. 2) Leviticus 19 uses various different words to refer to persons you are to act towards (e.g. רֵעֲךָ֖, עֲמִיתֽוֹ, עַמֶּ֔יךָ, בְּנֵ֣י עַמֶּ֔ךָ, אָחִ֖יךָ). If the "Neighbor" is the same as "the children of your people" or "your brother," why the changing of the terms?
Oct 31, 2016 at 20:55 history answered Dick Harfield CC BY-SA 3.0