re: #56 Obdicut

I’m sorry, I’m really not getting your question. Anthropologists wouldn’t be binding tefflin, unless they were Thor Heyerdahl. They’d be arguing, from whatever sources available, about how they were bound, and if there wasn’t enough to argue about, then they’d just say that they were bindings, the exact nature of they didn’t understand.

OK,ok… So they would not “get” tefillin. The also would not understand Kashrut, Taharat Mishpacha, what a mezuzzah was or what the definition of murder was in Jewish Law. They would not know what the structure of a Jewish court was, or the rules of evidence. The written Law just commands us to make courts.

In short they would have very very little except vague arguments over the history portions of the text.

In otherwords, they would have nothing.