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
knowledge; and their honourable men are famished, and their multitude
dried up with thirst.” (Isaiah v. 11-13.) And so Moses commands the
parents that should they have a son “a glutton and a drunkard,” to bring
him to justice, and to have him stoned. (Deut. xxi. 20.) The Talmud,
then, manifestly contradicts the Old Testament; it therefore cannot
speak truth when it narrates that God wrought a miracle in order to save
a drunkard and a murderer from that punishment, which He had himself
commanded to be visited upon either of these crimes. The story of the
miracle is therefore a palpable falsehood, contradictory to the law of
Moses, and derogatory to the honour of God. How, then, can the Talmud be
of God? If you attempt to distinguish, as some do, between the Talmud
and the oral law, and say that though the Talmud contains the oral law,
yet it is not all inspired, then we ask, how can you rely upon the
testimony of a witness convicted of wilful, gross, and flagrant
falsehood? If you do not believe in the above miracle of the drunken
Rabba, you denounce it as a liar. If it lie, then, upon this solemn
occasion in relating a miracle, in handing down the law of God, how can
you depend upon it at all? If it does not scruple to forge miracles,
what warrant have you for believing that it does not forge laws also?
But suppose, which is far more probable, that Rabbi Zira, when killed by
Rabba, had not come to life again, would Rabba, in the eye of the modern
Jewish law, be considered as a murderer, and guilty of death, or as an
innocent person, who might safely be permitted to go at large, and
pursue his usual avocations? This is a question well deserving an answer
from some of your learned men, and naturally suggested by some
principles asserted and implied in the following decisions of the oral
law:—
קריאת המגלה בזנה מצות עשה מדברי סופרים , והדברים ידועים שהיא תקנת
הנביאים , והכל חייבים בקריאתה , אנשים ונשים וגרים ועבדים משוחררים ,
ומחנכין את הקטנים לקריאתה , ואפילו כהנים בעבודמן מבטלין עבודתן ובאין
לשמוע מקרא מגלה , וכן מבטלין תלמוד תורה לשמוע מקרא מגלה , קל וחומר לשאר
מצוות של תורה שכולן נדחין מפני מקרא מגלה , ואין לך דבר שנדחה מקרא מגלה
מפניו חוץ ממה מצוה שאין לו קוברים שהפוגע בו קוברו תחלה ואחר כך קורא ׃
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