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 — John Shaqi
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
4thly, The general practice of the Israelites, as described in the
subsequent books of the Old Testament, directly contradicts the oral
law. We have seen already that the Prophet Daniel did not hold the
doctrine, that no mercy was to be shown to an idolater. When he knew of
the judgment that was about to descend on Nebuchadnezzar, he was deeply
distressed. “He was astonied for one hour, and his thoughts troubled
him;” and instead of leaving the idolater to perish, he endeavoured to
find means to ward off the calamity. The prophet Elisha was of the same
mind: when the idolatrous leper came to him for help, he administered
it, and, contrary to the Talmudic command, he administered it
_gratuitously_; and Gehazi, for acting in conformity to Talmudic
ordinance, and making the idolater pay, was smitten with the leprosy. (2
Kings v. 20.) In like manner, when the Syrian host was miraculously led
into Samaria, and the King of Israel proposed to act as a Talmudist and
smite them, the man of God answered, “Thou shalt not smite them;
wouldest thou smite those whom thou hast taken with thy sword and bow?
Set bread and water before them, that they may eat and drink and go to
their master.” (2 Kings vi. 21, 22.) This answer is important, as it not
only furnishes an example, but exhibits the principle, according to
which idolatrous captives, not Canaanites, were to be treated. The
prophet appeals to the general rule, “Wouldest thou smite those whom
thou hast taken captive with thy sword and bow? Even then, as they are
not Canaanites, they ought not to be smitten: therefore, in this case
much more, they ought to be treated with mercy.” We have still another
instance of a prophet acting contrary to the oral law, and in conformity
with the New Testament interpretation. The prophet Jonah once saw
idolaters “nigh unto death,” and ready to sink in the great deep, but he
had mercy on them, and pointed out the means of deliverance. When he
fled from the presence of the Lord, the mariners in whose ship he sailed
were idolaters; for when the storm raged, it is said, “They cried every
man unto his god.” In their anguish they said unto him, “What shall we
do unto thee, that the sea may be calm unto us?” In other words, “What
shall we do to save our lives?” Now if Jonah had been a Talmudist, it
would have been plainly not his duty to have told them, but to have
allowed the sea to rage on until the ship went to pieces, and he had the
satisfaction of seeing the idolaters go to the bottom. This would have
been an act of obedience to a precise command, and could have made no
difference to Jonah. For, as to himself, there are two suppositions
possible, either he knew that the Lord had prepared a fish to swallow
him, or he knew it not. If he knew it, then he was secure of his own
safety, and would have known that the fish could find him out just as
readily if the ship went to pieces, as if the idolaters threw him into
the sea.
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