Problems with Lunar Sabbath Theory

1. The text says nothing about reorienting the timing of the 7th day Sabbath according to the moon phase.

2. The day of the new moon is not said to be a day of ceasing (Numbers 28:11-15).  Only the 7th month's new moon day is said to be a day of ceasing (Numbers 29:1).

3.  The Hebrew word for "week" (sh-b-ay, shvua) is consonantally identical (that is, same consonants) to the word for "seven" (sh-b-ay, sheva), linguistically implying a week as seven days.  There is no mention of a week being less than seven days or longer than seven days.  Instructions to count for seven full Sabbaths (Leviticus 23:15) does not imply anything regarding special weeks existing.

4. One feast which requires ceasing from work is already timed adjacent to the 7th day Sabbath (Leviticus 23:21), so attempting to create a calendar to avoid this is textually impossible.  Saying that a feast day and a 7th day Sabbath should not fall back-to-back ignores this fact, because it already must in at least one instance per year.

5. The 7th day Sabbath is repeatedly stated to be on the 7th day of the week.  There is no textual basis for shifting it or adding additional separate Sabbaths.

6. The cycle of the moon is not evenly divisible by 7, and the extra days required to adjust the calendar to make the lunar Sabbath theory "work" are never mentioned.

7. Ultimately, establishing the lunar Sabbath theory requires inferring a system based upon something that is NOT said rather than using any actual textual or linguistic basis.  That is, it is based upon assumptions regarding completely unstated matters, and it requires the use of many new rules absent from mention in the text.

===
It is certainly true that many other calendar theories have some similar problems.  For example, use of the equinox is not referred to, nor is "sighting" the moon or the added rules to keep a repeatedly unsighted moon from causing significant deviation (i.e., "new month begins automatically after 30 days regardless of sighting").  In that sense, the aforementioned theories are not completely unique in going far beyond the text.

We can see, however, the connection between the "month" or "new moon" (ch-d-sh, chodesh) and "new" (ch-d-sh, chadash, or ch-d-sh-h, chadashah).  We can also see the connection between a "week" (sh-b-ay, shavua) and "seven" (sh-b-ay, sheva).  We can also see the alignment of the first month as being in conjunction with the ripening of the barley (Exodus 9:31, Exodus 13:4, Deuteronomy 16:1). 

Therefore, I propose we recognize the day of the new moon as the day of the new month (instead of the day following the sighting of the new crescent), that we consistently recognize a week as seven days, and that we align the timing of the first month, the "month [of] the Abib", with the ripening of the barley.  This, in my understanding and opinion, would not require the adding of unmentioned laws in order for it to be understood or to be done, and it would allow for the consistent alignment of the calendar with the seasons.

Unclean Birds Part 2

I am revisiting the issue of Unclean Birds due to multiple postings I've seen around recently on the issue.

I can understand the perspective of questioning whether chicken is unclean. I personally do not know whether it is or not, and as such I do not eat chicken meat or its eggs. However, my reasoning is very different, and I would disagree with some assertions I've witnessed.

Translating the Hebrew words for various birds is a major challenge because most of the bird names are only present in the prohibition passages. So, based on the Hebrew alone, the only source we might even have for that word existing is a single use in the text, and all we can readily deduce from that evidence is that it is some type of unclean flying thing. Even many bird words that do appear repeatedly in the text are not readily translatable and could be referring to any number of birds. Furthermore, no specific criteria are given for determining clean vs unclean (such as with fins and scales or cloven and cud), and instead we are only told what birds are unclean. This is what I would perceive as the problem. Since we do not necessarily know what all of the unclean birds are, we do not know whether chicken is one of them.

Defining clean vs unclean by what an animal eats is a common perspective, but it is nevertheless non-textual. Mammals we determine by whether or not they have cloven hooves and chew the cud (Lev 11:3). Fish we determine by whether or not they have fins and scales (Lev 11:9). Insects we determine by whether or not they have locust-style jumping legs (Lev 11:21). None of these criteria actually specify what sort of diet the animal must eat. While one might presume a generalization regarding the diet of the allowed or forbidden animals, this is not always accurate, nor is it textual. For example, deer are certainly clean, but certain kinds have actually been known to cannibalize each other or to eat mice and birds on occasion. Clean fish will also eat unclean things like insects and unclean water-life. However, that does not change whether or not these animals are clean. The textual criteria has not been violated.

A similar situation would presumably exist for birds (or “flyers”, actually). As stated, we are given a list of unclean birds. Of the few birds that we do know from the Hebrew, we can recognize vultures and ravens as unclean, and indeed, these birds would be considered “scavengers” in modern classification. However, the command does not actually say “all scavengers are unclean” or anything like that. Instead, it refers to “all raven to his type”, “vulture”, etc. A chicken is not a raven or a vulture. Claiming it as a “scavenger”, as I have witnessed asserted, and therefore claiming it as prohibited is baseless when it comes to the text. Bird types are prohibited because they are listed as unclean, not because it supposedly shares a single characteristic with another bird. It is often asserted that quail are definitively clean, even though they will eat insects and their own feces and will eat each other's eggs and will try to kill each other at times (I've previously raised hundreds of quail). What is the difference between a bird eating an unclean insect and a different bird eating an unclean rodent? There isn't a difference based upon the text, and once again, that's not a listed criterion. A chicken is not a type of raven, nor is it a type of vulture, and it isn't even conventionally considered a “scavenger” (if one was going by that non-textual category). If it's not a type of bird that's prohibited, then it is clean. However, as I stated, it would seem to be unknown as to all of the birds that are prohibited.

Furthermore, presuming to create a category of what defines clean birds is just as problematic.  As I will soon elaborate on, the only two birds that we presumably have certainty regarding being clean are doves and pigeons, and they are extremely unique in relation to many other birds (producing "crop milk").  Additionally, assertions regarding "clean birds have crops and four talons for perching", etc, are baseless as well, especially when the people who are claiming these categories do not actually have knowledge regarding the birds that they presume to be clean.

On the notion of defining the birds, there is one method I have used to attempt to solve the problem. The LXX version of the Torah, being a contemporaneous translation of the Hebrew (being supposedly translated separately from the NK of the TNK), would seem to be a largely untapped resource. Additionally, given the widespread use of its language, there are a vastly greater number of resources to allow us to translate the bird list. That being said, even it does not provide a clear or consistent rendering of the birds list. Here is what I translated from it:

Lev 11 (LXX) “13...the eagle and the bearded-vulture and the osprey 14 and the vulture and kite and those similar [of] him 15 and raven and those similar [of] him 16 and [sparrow or ostrich] and owl and gull and those similar [of] him and hawk and those similar [of] him 17 and long-eared-owl and [swooping or sea bird] and ibis 18 and purple-swamp-hen and pelican and swan 19 and owl and heron and thickknee and those similar [of] him and hoopoe and bat.”

Dt 14 (LXX) “12...the eagle and the bearded-vulture and the osprey 13 and the vulture and the kite and those similar [of] him 14 and all raven and those similar [of] him 15 and [sparrow or ostrich] and owl and gull 16 and heron and swan and ibis 17 and [unknown] and hawk and those similar [of] him and hoopoe and long-eared-owl 18 and pelican and thickknee and those similar [of] him and purple-swamp-hen and bat.”

So, as seen here, the orders differ when comparing the two Hebrew lists to the LXX lists, though the content between the two LXX lists is consistent with each other. If this list is reliable, I might make some generalizations, but even this list is not completely translated. So, arguably, the one I wrote “unknown” for could be a chicken or jungle-fowl, but that's not known.

Additionally, in other discussions I've witnessed, quail were referred to as definitively clean. What's interesting is that the LXX does not actually say “quail”, but instead, it seems to say “the bird that migrates with the quail”. This might actually be referring to the corn crake. It would certainly be an odd deviation if it was indeed contrary to the Hebrew wording, especially since it was translated contemporaneously to Hebrew language use. So, even quail could be up for debate arguably.

So, from my perspective, the Hebrew unclean bird list is not readily translated, and the LXX translation is both incomplete and possibly uncertain as to its validity. The reason a chicken would be unclean is because of its presence in the prohibited list, or it would be clean because of its exclusion from the prohibited list. While I understand the motivation to make categorizations in an attempt to personally understand the text, that does not make our generalizations accurate or textual. Non-textual criteria is exactly that, non-textual.

Rounding Your Head

Leviticus 19:27a from the Hebrew is typically rendered something like, "You shall not cause to round edge of your head...". The LXX reads, "You shall not do roll-of-hair out-of the hair [of] the head [of] you...".

I've heard various theories throughout the years regarding the command talking about bowl-cuts and such, but the LXX rendering provides an interesting angle to things. Maybe "round[ing]" the edge is not so much about going around your head in cutting, but causing the border of your hair to be rounded into a roll or braid of some sort.

The LXX rendering is still within the scope of the ambiguous Hebrew wording, and I would think the LXX, while certainly not being identical to the Masoretic, would have some value in it being a contemporaneous translation (i.e., "biblical" Hebrew was still in use at the time it was translated).
Of course, some people like to ask "why" certain commands exist, and some people feel the need to or otherwise like to claim they know "why", but it's kind of a blind alley when there is little textual explanation provided. Simply because we might perceive that we had a moral justification for a particular understanding does not make that understanding textually or linguistically accurate.

How I Do Tzitzit (Tassels) on Various Garments - Pictorial Step-by-Step Guide

Since I've had many people ask me over the years regarding how tzitzit / tsitsit / tassels should be made, and since there seems to be a lack of initiative on the part of many to actually try to follow the tassel command, I've decided to do something a little different from my normal posts and post this step-by-step guide.  

The Command
First, let's discuss the details of the command.

Many traditions and opinions exist regarding how tassels are to be made.  Some assert they should be made into "chains", others assert that they must be wrapped and knotted in a certain numerical pattern using a certain number of threads.  In addition to this, there are many assertions regarding how tassels only need to be on a very specific four-cornered garment (tallit) which only needs to be worn when praying or on holidays, or that only the exterior garment which covers "the nakedness" area needs to have tassels.  Well, as usual, most of these assertions are baseless when it comes to the text of the commands.

Our two primary sources on this matter are going to be:
Numbers 15:38-40

Word to sons [of] Yisrael, and you shall say to them, And they shall do to them blossom on wings [of] their clothes to their generations, and they shall give on blossom [of] the wing twine [of] hyacinth. And he shall be to you to blossom, and you shall see » him, and you shall remember » all [of] commandments [of] YAHUAH, and you shall do » them, and you shall not explore after your heart and after your eyes, which you [were] ones prostituting after them, to purpose [of] you shall remember, and you shall do » all [of] my commandments, and you shall be holy ones to your Elohim.

Deuteronomy 22:12

Greatnesses/growings you shall do to you on four wings [of] your enveloping which you shall envelop in her.

The text does not specify exactly how these tassels are to be, other than they are to be on four wings of the garments we cover ourselves with, and they are to have a twine of hyacinth (LXX, or tkeleth in Hebrew).  One might infer that a tassel must include something in addition to the twine of hyacinth since they are spoken of as existing apart from that twine (i.e., at least two twines total).

The term for "wing" is what is literally used for the wings of birds and is conventionally rendered as "corner".  However, a "wing" does not so much come to a "corner" or "point" in the way I am considering it.  In my understanding, a wing could include a rounded-edge or even a straight portion of fabric.  That being said, even if one was to interpret it as a "corner", most garments do have multiple corners to them, despite some asserting that "we don't wear cornered garments today".  In my view, the "tallit" is a later invention and is not what was intended by the text, and four wings can be found on any garment.

Regarding the blue / hyacinth/ tkeleth, it is arguably an unresolved issue.  There are theories that the blue dye was dibromo-indigotin produced by the murex mollusk, but this is uncertain and obviously has problems.  It is thought that the Canaanites farmed these creatures for dye, and while they can supposedly be "milked" (agitated) alive to collect the dye, it is otherwise argued that they were killed to harvest the dye (which has obvious potential for problems since they are unclean animals).  However, if we look at the LXX, the Greek translation of tkeleth is the word for hyacinth.  In my perspective, it is unclear as to whether the source of the dye or the end-result color is what is being specified by the command, and that being the case, I ultimately am choosing to go with a blue colored twine in the absence of conclusive evidence otherwise.  Is it definitively tkeleth?  That is unknown.  However, I have the view that we should be doing according to our best interpretation, and I would think having something that is at the very least "close" to what is commanded would be far preferable to not even trying at all.

Finally, in regard to which garments need to have them, there is no specification that only certain garments that are worn at certain times need to have them.  The command says they are to be on our "clothes" and "your enveloping which you shall envelop in her".  The corresponding Hebrew words are used very broadly and might even include any article of cloth which is being worn.  In my application of this, that would include shirts, hats, pants, shorts, skirts, dresses, socks, pajamas, gloves, scarves, vests, undergarments, etc, for man, woman, and child.  Also, simply because you are the only one who might see the garment (such as with underwear), it does not mean that the garment does not need tassels, since you are to look on them and remember the commands, not necessarily other people.  Furthermore, even a blanket could be argued as requiring them, since we are basically wearing the blanket in bed (and some people wear a blanket around the house for that matter).  There is nothing that specifies that only one garment we are wearing needs to have them, and it would be my inclination to seek to obey the command and therefore apply tassels to my garments rather than trying to assume some excuse to not do so.

Examples

I must make it clear that this is NOT definitively a Hebrew wearing the commanded tzitzit. It is an ancient depiction from Kemet of an individual that appears to be wearing tassels on what I would consider the "four wings" of his garment. As pictured, he actually has three tassels on each of the four wings, presumably (though the wing in the background is not actually seen, but I think it's a reasonable guess). The theoretical dating of this picture, from what I understand, would actually go back before the giving of the Torah through Moses, but it is not certain that the presumed dating of the picture is accurate. Likewise, it is not definitively a Hebrew person obeying the Torah either. This may or may not be evidence of my points, but either way it is a depiction that relates to my understanding.

Blue twine attached to an already tasseled scarf.  I might theorize that this could more closely resemble the practice in ancient times, though that is debatable.  Either way, this garment already had tassels on it, and I simply tied blue twine to the tassels at the four corners.

A coat with tassels sewn on.  This jacket had three sections of fabric at the bottom which came to six corners.  I chose to place them near where the pieces of fabric were joined, but could have done it differently.  Many shirts have "tails" which have a similar construction.  One might also use the "four corners" of a button-up shirt that are present when laying it out flat (the two bottom corners at the tails and the two top corners at the collar).

Removable tassel looped around a belt-loop.  This is a particularly common way to attach tassels to pants and is the way that I generally choose to do so on such a garment.  The tassel can easily be transferred to another garment with belt-loops as necessary.  Arguably, the tassels on the pants could be placed at the bottom instead, such as two at each leg hole (similarly with skirts, kilts, dresses, etc).  This would require a different mounting method, obviously.

A fabric cap with tassels.  The tassels were sewn on and then trimmed very short, and they are relatively unobtrusive as such.  As an associate put it, "they don't have to be garish."

The text does not say only one garment we wear needs to have tassels.  Instead, we are told that our clothes are to have them.  Visible here are tassels from the coat, shirt, and pants.  Four tassels with blue are on each garment.

Now, I've heard all kinds of excuses for not wearing tassels, including "I don't think they're necessary", "They look stupid", "I haven't seen any that I like", and "I don't like the people that wear them".  The first excuse is obviously invalid if one concerns himself with the text.  In regard to other people wearing them, while I can certainly understand why someone would not want to be mistaken for believing a way that they disagree with, we must keep in mind that the tassels are commanded, and I'm sure that there are other things that people we disagree with do similarly as well (whether it be claiming to worship the same God, not working on the 7th day, claiming to believe the Torah to be true, etc).  Finally, in regard to not liking how they look, if that's the way you feel, then be creative and make them the way they would most appeal to you, so long as you are following the command.  If you don't like them no matter what, then too bad, because there are plenty of people out there that want to eat unclean things, or men that want to lie with other men, or people that want to be with their families while their families celebrate pagan holidays.  It's no excuse.  If you intend to observe the Torah, then do it.


The Making and Attaching Tassels
Take note that this is not the only way tassels can be made, nor should it be considered the "right" way to do things.  It is a way that I do it, and it is a way that I have chosen to do it that I perceive as fulfilling the requirements of my understanding of the command.  If you want to modify my procedure or do something very different, that's great, just make sure you are doing the command.

For the purposes of the guide, I will be making tassels and then attaching them to a t-shirt.  The same general guidelines can be used for making removable tassels for belt-loops as well, for example, if one desires.

1. Assemble materials and tools
You will need some sort of twine.  Here I have spools of embroidery floss as well as a package of skeins (coils) of embroidery floss.  You could theoretically use yarn, twine, or even parachute cord.  You could have many different colors in one tassel or just have solid blue.  Just make sure you have blue.  Scissors are handy as well.  You will also need a means of attaching the tassels to the garment (such as a sewing machine, a hand-sewing kit, safety pins, the use of belt-loops, etc).  I will be using a sewing machine.  Walmart sells all these supplies.

2. Preparing the twine

You will need to decide how long your tassels will be and how many twines they will contain.  I generally use four pieces of twine per tassel, two blue and two of another color.  You could use many more of any variation of colors (so long as there is blue), or in theory you could use a single twine of blue as the entire tassel (each twine of embroidery floss is composed of multiple strands already).  
Concerning lengths, this will depend on factors such as the targeted garment and the method of attachment, but my main suggestion will be to make them longer than you think!  You can always trim them shorter later if you so choose.  Knotting and tying the tassels often eats up more of the thread length than I'd expect (see the picture).  On the t-shirt, I might aim for about 1.5 inches finished tassel length, but if I am making them to be tied to belt-loops, I might aim for about 8 inches finished length (the longer length and larger loop helps to keep them from falling off).  I ended up with about 4.5 inch lengths for my twine for the tassels I made for the guide, which resulted in 1.5 inch tassels.  

The way that I cut the lengths of twine is not by measuring each individual length.  If you want to measure each piece, then skip ahead to Step 3.  Once again, this will depend on your personal needs and preferences, but this is how I do it:
I will be making the tassels with an equal number of brown and blue twine.  I am going to be cutting up a whole skein of brown with the blue for a large number of tassels for multiple garments.  I start by holding the ends from the blue and brown together in one hand.

I take my other hand and hold the threads together as well.  I pull both kinds of thread out at the same time, guiding them through that hand to get approximately the same length of each color.

After going through the entire length of the brown twine, I cut the blue twine that came off of the spool.  Once I cut up all of this twine, I will have the same number of strands for each color.  If I wanted half as many blue as brown, I would simply unwind the brown, fold it in half, then pull out the blue twine as described above until it was the length of the folded piece.

I bring all of the ends together and start by holding them at that end.

I run the lengths of twine back through my fingers.  Once I get to the end, I cut the loop, approximately halving the lengths of twine.

I bring all of the ends together again.  I repeat this process repeatedly such that I am repeatedly halving the thread lengths until they get near the length I desire.  Remember, err on the side of being too long!

After this cut I will have a large number of twine pieces that are about 4.5 inches long.  They will not be exact, but in my view that does not matter, since trimming is generally going to be necessary to even up the tassel when you finish either way.







3. Grouping the twine 

Separate the twine according to how you intend to make your tassels.  I'm making four tassels composed of two blue and two brown strands each.







4. Looping and knotting

In my experience, the tassel needs a knotted loop to securely be attached to anything, regardless of the method of attachment.  If you are making tassels to wrap around belt-loops, you might want to make the loop at least 1.5 inches finished length (i.e., measuring from where my fingers are positioned to the top of the loop).  On these, since I am sewing them onto the shirt, I will be aiming for less than 0.5 inches.  Smaller loop in this case will mean less likely to snag on things.

I prefer to use an "overhand loop knot" to secure the loop (Google it if you need to).  It can help to twist the thread before doing this.  In the case of making small tassels, this is a step where it might become obvious as to why I suggested cutting them too long and then trimming afterward.

Here's the tassel after it's been knotted once.  With these particular tassels, I am mostly done at this point.  However, with a longer tassel you could continue to do further knots, or wrap thread around a particular way, or twist the thread and then knot it further (a way I like), or you could braid the thread.  Here's yet another opportunity to be creative.

5. Trimming
I trim my tassels so that the ends are even and so that the tassels are approximately the same length.  If you are making the tassels very small, you might want to attach them before you trim.

Ready to be attached!

6. Attaching to the garment
As mentioned, I will be sewing these on to a t-shirt.  While I prefer a sewing machine, you certainly could use a hand-sewing needle (which is affordable and readily available).  I have measured approximately 4 inches from the edge of the shirt when laid out flat.  I am sewing them to the inside along the existing stitching.

Back and forth a few times.

One tassel attached!  Three more to go.

The outside of the shirt.  I used olive thread that doesn't match, but whatever.  Use what you deem appropriate.









 
6b. Alternative methods for attaching
If you don't want to use a sewing machine, then there are alternatives.  Safety pins are a good temporary/emergency solution and can theoretically be used long-term if necessary (I would suggest high-quality safety pins if you want them to stay on).  Loops themselves can serve as an attachment point.  While I don't do it, I've even seen people use these spring-loaded clips to attach them to their belt-loops.  
The tassels pictured were simply made longer and knotted again.

Looping through a belt-loop.  A tassel could also be tied around the loop permanently.  One could also do similarly by manually putting holes in a garment, but this runs the risk of damaging the garment.

This tassel pictured was braided using several drab colors.

Run the tassel end through the tassel loop.

Secured.  Longer length knotted loops will tend to be more secure than loops that are too small to fully wrap around the belt-loop.  Also, longer overall tassel lengths will help prevent them from falling off.

 Tip for attachment by loop:  Try tying one or more small lengths of thread around the loop to keep the twines together.  This just makes transferring the tassel from garment to garment easier.















7. Wear the garment

Four tassels have been attached.











The garment is on.  "They don't have to be garish," but they can be if you want.











An Alternative Method (preferred for socks, gloves, etc)
In my view, socks and gloves are still clothes, believe it or not.  Attaching tassels in the way that is described above is not my preferred way of dealing with these types of clothes.  Tassels on socks attached in the preceding way, aside from being more difficult to do, tend to be both more obvious and less secure, and they tend to easily come off in the wash.  The following method could theoretically be used for any garment, however.
  
1. Assemble materials and tools

This process is very simple.  All you need is a hand-sewing needle with a large eye (the pictured needle kit was less than $2, if I remember correctly) and the blue twine along with another twine (either another of the same blue or something else).  You can get more creative if you wish, of course.

This might be a good opportunity to consider whether or not you know if your socks contain "other fibers" or "reprocessed fibers" (both can include a mix of linen and wool).  This is actually common with socks and gloves both.  I know I had to turn a number of my old socks into rags because of not having a way to easily check on their content.

2. Thread the needle
Just pull a few inches of each twine through the needle eye.  This one was sized appropriately for the embroidery floss.  The twine is not pre-cut to any length and is being pulled directly off of the spool.  With this kind of needle I can easily get two pieces of twine in at the same time.




3. Insert needle

Insert the needle from the outside into the sock.  Yes, I prefer tube socks, but that doesn't matter.

4. Run the needle back outside
Insert the needle from the inside of the sock and run it back outside.  I do not insert the needle immediately next to where I came in, but it doesn't need to be spaced very far away.







5. Pulling the twine through and making the initial cut

Pull the twine through.  I personally only use two pieces of twine when I do this.

As you remove the needle from the twine, you can pull the loop of thread out in the process, just leaving two pieces of twine threaded through the sock.  At this point I make my initial cut.  Start with a much longer length than you intend to finish with as it will make knotting MUCH easier.





6. Knotting  and Trimming
I advise trying to keep the knot as close to the sock fabric as possible.  By doing this, it will be less likely to get caught on things.


Now we can trim the tassel to its finished length.  I prefer them to be short on socks and the like.


 

 7. Finish

 Complete the process for each of the four, and you're done.  Oh wait, you probably aren't going to be doing a single sock by itself, so make that eight total.

Conclusion
There are countless ways that tassels can be made and integrated into a garment.  What's important is that we adhere to the guidelines we are given in the text.  I do not consider my way to be the only way or even necessarily the most "correct" way to do it, but the methods I have described are ways that I perceive as adhering to the commands.  

If you think there's a better way, or if you perceive that a different way is the way it's supposed to be done, then by all means, do it that way.  If you want your tassels to be inconspicuous, then permanently attach them and make them small and drab (with blue, of course).  If you want them to be flashy, then get your favorite neon colors and combine any variety with the blue.  If you prefer them to be braided, chained, twisted, etc, then do it that way.  Just don't make a single tassel of red and white then attach it to your key-ring and claim to be adhering to the command (I've seen it), and don't whine about how you don't want to do it if you really intend to observe.  

Do and guard the commands.

On Ezra's Alleged Authorship of the Torah

Some assert that Ezra wrote the Torah, or at least compiled it.   While I might be able to understand such a theory in some sense, it is a rather problematic one when considering the text of the Torah.  Ezra and Nehemiah, according to the TNK, were working with reestablishing a temple.  It would thus be perplexing for a supposedly newly written Torah, which they were supposedly intending to enforce, to contain so many self-indicting commands, especially in the case of rituals.  For what reason would "Ezra" write that the rituals are supposed to be done at the Tent of Appointment/Tabernacle, or that the giving of the Tabernacle would be a blessing for Israel's obedience (Lev 26:11), if he intended no such observance whatsoever?  If one is creating a new theological authority, then for what reason would one not write it to support one's intentions?

There are few secondary gains to Ezra writing that the commanded rituals be done at the Tent, only for him to enforce that they be done at a temple.  It seems very likely that the rituals were being interpreted by Ezra to be applying to a temple structure rather than the Tent, despite the wording of the commandments, just as many of us had done in the past as well.

I can certainly understand someone misreading the rituals of the Torah or otherwise reading and misinterpreting them.  However, it makes little sense to supposedly be writing new rituals only to do them in a way other than the way they are written.  Therefore, in the light of certain components of my current understanding, I think the Ezra authorship argument is very flawed.

Spiritual Feelings and Unconscious Inclinations

I've heard people state in the past that they don't "feel convicted" about a certain belief or a certain behavior. That is, they don't "feel" like God wants them to do or to not do something. For example, I've heard claims of this sort in regard to male homosexuality, not wearing tzitzit, etc. This is regardless of whether the thing is explicitly prohibited or required by the commandments of the God that they profess.

I'm sure many can recognize when we've encountered another who seemed to have different personal feelings from us in regard to a theological issue. Whether it be a minor issue or a major issue, many have strong personal feelings. Obviously, the endless number of denominations and different belief systems should be evidence of this. We can encounter people who believe something very different from us, and these people can feel extremely uncomfortable with hearing what we have to say. Many of these people also believe that the "spirit" leads them, and believe that it makes them feel that certain way. These feelings can potentially be some sort of spiritual guidance, but they could also be personal feelings based upon a person's experiences. In turning toward ourselves, for what reason should we assume that our personal feelings are the only ones that are valid, or the only ones that are truly from God?

In my personal experience, I know that I have felt discomfort in regard to doing certain things that I now realize are not prohibited by the commands. In studying the text and reassessing my beliefs, I know that at various points in my journey my feelings on certain behaviors or beliefs have changed. I might have thought something was wrongdoing based upon adhering to a false teaching for a time (such as rabbinic doctrine), then initially had lingering feelings of discomfort in allowing that behavior, even after recognizing it was acceptable by the standard of the actual commandments. On the other hand, I might have thought and also felt something was acceptable, and then later changed my understanding of that command.

It seems that many have assumed that certain feelings are inherently messages from God. While I certainly do believe that some feelings can be something of that sort, in many cases, what has been interpreted as such a message is simply a message from our subconscious mind that is based upon our personal experiences and beliefs. Many out there have been effectively taught to rely on these feelings to know what God wants, and have been told or otherwise arrived at the conclusion that they have strong spiritual senses. Despite this, many of these people with allegedly strong senses can have strong disagreements on theology when talking with each other. If it was all certainly to be from God and to be accurate, then for what reason would such a disagreement occur?

Feelings of any sort can be useful. However, if we believe the text of the commandments to be valid, then we should ensure that our personal feelings do not blind us to what the text says. Yes, this can go on with each of us, not just other people. We personally need to be careful in what we assume from a feeling we might feel.

A Temporary Blessing?

If the Tabernacle was only to be a temporary structure for Israel's wandering of the desert, then for what reason does a blessing of obedience in Lev 26:11 state that the Tabernacle (Mishkan) shall be given in the midst of Israel when they obey? These blessings are very clearly talking about dwelling in the land (Lev 26:4-6,10).

It is not just a matter of "do what the Torah says and be blessed". There are specific blessings, and, in this case, some of these blessings are inconvenient to recognize when one has been holding certain beliefs.