A Book Containing Proofs That the Christians Adopted Their Books without Reliable Testimonies

The Jew says: A proof that he [Jesus] upheld the precepts of the Torah and that there was nothing in his [mind] that he commanded except these [precepts] is the fact that in the 16th chapter of Luke he told the story of Lazarus and the rich man and what their circumstances came to [in the end] and that he [the rich man] was told: “They have Moses and the prophets and if they do not accept [what] they [say], they will not accept either [what is said] by one who came alive from the dead. He [Jesus] does not mention a book which was revealed to him or with regard to which he received an order other than the Torah and the prophets.

If they say the story is but a parable [indicating] what will happen, [this means that] it is a proof that the commandments of the Torah will remain [valid] and obligatory for people till the end of time: What is professed and chosen by Simon Cephas, and James [Ya‘qub] Paul and [men] like them in the book of the Acts is not mentioned in the books of the prophets, is absurd and contradicts the foregoing, and even more so if [taken in conjunction] with their appeal to you to accept the doctrine of the Trinity and to break the covenant [which] God [using] the tongues of the prophets [made] with His saints.” [ . . . ]

The Jew says: . . . As regards your belief that the Torah orders to retaliate and that Jesus orders to forgive, the destruction of the Torah which you have imagined has not taken place. Rather did he obey the order of the prophet Jeremiah to the Children of Israel [to exercise]—after [the power of] government and royalty were gone—forgiveness with regard to those who are not ruled by [the lex] talionis revealed by God to his prophets. God, may He be honored and exalted forbade in his book to take . . . blood money from those who are subject to talio. Now Jeremiah says: Happy is the man who has suppressed his anger since his youth subjects his cheek to him who smites him and sits alone in silence. Perhaps he will be granted peace. Isaiah and Jesus recommended forgiveness and the abandonment of rancour in this sense, and not in order to abrogate what God has ordered in his book for the protection of His servants. He did not neglect them. Thus [when] some of them receive from others [various] sorts of hurts such as having their eyes put out, their ears cut off, being killed, and so forth, [God’s servants] are charged [with exacting from those who did these things] a similar [punishment]. [ . . . ]

The Jew says: he mentions after this the disagreement of the disciples with Jesus and their not having accepted what he had commanded concerning the observance of the commandments of the Torah. He claims that, because of their love of dominion and of their being complaisant with people and taking their property, Simon, James, Paul, and the other apostles abrogated the Torah and selected the provision with regard to which they agreed that there should be “change, thus circumcision, ablutions after an emission of semen and after menstruation and praying when facing the East.¹ Neither Jesus nor any one of the prophets [did] it. [The same applies to] eating that which God has forbidden, [to] profaning the Sabbath, to adopting Sunday which was not adopted by Jesus, nor revealed in the Book of God or in the prophecies of the prophets, but through the obduracy and the ruse of the disciples. For in their lust for dominion they agreed to abrogate that which was revealed by God to Moses and confirmed by Jesus in the Gospel.” In addition, he has said to Matthew: “I did not come to abrogate the Torah and the books of the prophets. Whoever abrogates one of their precepts is called diminished in the kingdom of heaven.” They addressed themselves to the idolatrous nations who did not know either God’s Book or His commandments; and they inclined to make concessions [to these nations] and to make things easy for them. [ . . . ]

The position of the Children of Israel is strengthened by what is recounted in the 1st Chapter of the Acts: namely, that after his death and resurrection, Jews appeared to his disciples, while they were assembled. And they asked him, saying: Our Lord, will the kingdom be restored to the Children of Israel at this time? And Jesus said to them: It is not for you to know that time, for the times were set by the Lord through his [own] power. This is a proof that he had taught them that the Children of Israel have a kingdom, which will be restored to them. For it was necessary for them to know this; the knowledge of God concerning this being beyond him [?]‌. If Jesus had not taught them before that time that the Jews had a kingdom which would be restored to them, their question on this [point] would have been impossible and their mention of it reproved: he would have answered them that their kingdom had come to an end, that they had no kingdom, after it had gone from them. When we see that you mention in your book the answer which Jesus [gave] to their question it is necessary [to draw the conclusion] that he would not have answered them on this [point] unless words concerning this had been [spoken] by him before; and that they wished to know the time of [the event]; he [for his part] refused [to let them have this knowledge] referring them to the Father.