Aligned sentence by sentence
, ,
After these seven, I think I should fix one argument of theirs that deserves extended discussion. They say: just as the reason for believing Moses was his performance of signs and proofs, so belief in anyone else must also be grounded in his performing signs and proofs.
,
I was greatly astonished when I heard this — for the reason for our belief in Moses was not miraculous signs alone.
,
The reason for believing him — and every prophet — is that they first called us to what is permissible. When we heard the call and found it permissible, we demanded proofs for it.
But if we heard a call that was impermissible from the outset, we would not demand proofs — for there is no proof for the impossible.
, ,
This is the approach with every claimant to prophecy: if he says to us 'My Lord commands you to fast today,' we demand from him the sign of mission. If he shows it to us, we accept and fast.
, , ,
But if he says 'My Lord commands you to commit adultery and theft,' or 'informs you that He will bring a flood of water' — we do not demand a sign, since he is calling us to what is impermissible by reason or by transmitted report.
Aligned sentence by sentence
— who witnessed signs and proofs that abandoned what is in our minds: the esteeming of truth and the finding repugnant of falsehood and the like.
,
Some of them argue for abrogation from scriptural passages. I think I should present these passages and what is said about them.
,
The first is the Torah's verse: 'The LORD came from Sinai, He shone from Seir upon them; He appeared from Mount Paran' (Deut. 33:2) — these three are names for Mount Sinai.
For every mountain extending alongside several towns is divided into segments named after the town that faces each segment —
,
— just as one sea acquires many names from the towns facing it. So Mount Sinai is a mountain that faces Sinai, Seir, and Paran.
Aligned sentence by sentence
I found that in enumeration, some verbs take a past form while others take a present-future form —
, ,
Just as our ancestors' errors in the wilderness are enumerated: 'They rebelled at the sea, at the Red Sea, they soon forgot His works, they had a wanton craving in the wilderness' (Ps. 106:7–14).
I found still others arguing from Jeremiah's words: 'Behold, days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah' (Jer. 31:31).
,
I said to them: look at what follows it — for it makes explicit that this 'new covenant' is the very same Torah, as it says: 'For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD: I will put My Torah within them' (Jer. 31:33).
. .
Section 9. After these arguments I found that they have additional apparent scriptural proofs through which they claim to see abrogation of the law.
,
The first of them is Adam's sons marrying his daughters, which they say is an abrogation. But it is not an abrogation — rather, it was a dispensation.
, ,
For we believe that [marrying] a sister was forbidden even before Moses — but Adam's sons married this way from absolute necessity, since there were no other rational beings. When offspring multiplied, the dispensation lapsed.
Aligned sentence by sentence
I found yet others arguing from Jeremiah's statement: 'Behold, days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah.'
. . , ,
Section 9. After these arguments, I found apparent scriptural proofs through which they claim to see abrogation of the law — there are many, and what could be added is even more, but I have limited myself to ten questions.
, ,
The first is Adam's sons marrying his daughters, which they claim is an abrogation. It is not an abrogation — it was a dispensation, since we believe a sister is forbidden from before Moses.
,
Adam's sons married this way from necessity since there were no other rational beings. Once the population expanded, the dispensation for anyone who came after was cut off.
, ,
The second: that Cain was sentenced for killing Abel only to wandering and banishment, while afterward the ruling for every killer became death. This too is not an abrogation.
,
For the Wise One does not command the killing of a killer except through a court and witnesses. Since these did not exist at the time Cain killed Abel, the death penalty did not apply to him.