and against thy two friends.

בן נח שאנסו אנס לעבור על אחת ממצותיו : מותר | ,Therefore לו לעבור אפילו נאנס לעבוד ע'ז' עובד • לפי שאינן | take unto you now seven bullocks and seven

מצוון על קדוש השם •

rams, and go to my servant Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt-offering, and my ser vant Job shall pray for you, for him will I accept." (Job xlii. 7, 8.) It was not known to Elisha. When Naaman said, "Shall there not then, I pray thee, be given to thy servant two mules' burden of earth? For thy servant will henceforth offer neither burnt-offering nor sacrifice unto other gods, but unto the Lord." (2 Kings v. 17.) Elisha made no objection. He did not tell him that he had only seven commandments to attend to. Neither had Isaiah any idea that, when Judaism triumphed, the whole world was to be compelled to adhere to the seven commandments, for he plainly predicts the contrary. "And the Lord shall be known to Egypt, and the Egyptians shall know the Lord in that day, and shall do sacrifice and oblation; yea, they shall vow a vow unto the Lord and perform it." (Isaiah xix. 21.) Here again, then, the oral law contradicts the Word of God.

But the law of God points out to us an eleventh commandment, in the distinction between clean and unclean animals. The Lord commanded Noah to take of the former by sevens and of the latter by pairs. (Gen. vii. 2.) And when Noah came forth from the ark "he builded an altar unto the Lord; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt-offerings on the altar." (Gen. viii. 2.) It is plain, from the command, that a greater number of clean than unclean animals was required. Noah's conduct shows that the rite of sacrifice was the cause of the requirement. We have a twelfth commandment in the appointment of a priesthood. "Melchizedek was the priest of the Most High God," (Gen. xiv. 10,) which he most certainly could not have been, if he had not been divinely appointed. From the law itself, then, we have made out twelve distinct commandments. Eight would have been sufficient to overthrow the oral tradition. But we appeal to the common sense of every Talmudist. We ask him to look over the meagre list of the seven commandments, in which neither love to God nor man is included, and to tell us whether it be at all probable that "the God of the spirits of all flesh" would leave all mankind, excepting the small company of Rabbinists, without any better rule for time, and any better guide to eternity? Is it possible that the God of love and mercy should leave the majority of his reasonable creatures in doubt as to his love, and tell them that he requires no love from them? Yet this is what the oral law says. The Gentiles are, according to it, left without any direction as to the worship of God, and are pronounced guilty of death if they study the law. Nay, they are expressly told that God does not require them to glorify him by their obedience.

come.

"A Noahite who is forced to transgress one of his commandments, it is lawful for him to do so. Even if he be compelled to commit idolatry he may commit it, for they are not commanded to sanctify God." (Hilchoth Melachim, c. x. 2.) So that, according to the rabbies, the Noahite who is compelled to commit murder, adultery, or even to deny his God, may do it with impunity; he still belongs to the pious of the nations of the world," and may have a share in the world to We confess that we cannot see in this doctrine either charity or toleration. We can discover only that narrowness of heart which characterizes the oral law. In order to magnify themselves, and depreciate the other nations, the rabbies first swell out their own commandments to 613, and reduce the commandments of the nations to seven. But not content with that, they also strive to confine the glories of martyrdom to themselves, and tell the Gentiles that God does not require them to sanctify His name. Can such doctrine come from God? Is God the God of the Rabbinists only? We grant that the Jews are his "peculiar people." We acknowledge that "they have much advantage every way that they are beloved for the fathers' sakes"-that the time is coming when "all that see them shall acknowledge them that they are the seed whom the Lord has blessed." But we still think that God's heart is large enough to comprehend us Gentiles too in his love. We know that we are the work of His hand, and we trust that, as He is our father, he requires, and is pleased to see even in Gentiles, the feelings of children, love and filial fear. And we found this our faith on your Scriptures as well as ours. The Word of God tells us that, long before there were any rabbies in the world, He had a gracious and tender care for all mankind. He promised to our first parents a Saviour who should "bruise the serpent's head." He saved Noah and his family, not one of whom was a rabbi, from the deluge; and when they came forth from the ark, He made a gracious covenant not with one nation only, but "with all flesh," and hung up on high a lovely and glittering arch, from one end of the heavens to the other, that all the habitants of earth might have a token of their Father's love, and learn to look up to Him with humble confidence. When he chose Abraham and his seed, it was not an act of partiality, but that in his seed all the families of the earth might be blessed. He did not leave himself without witness to the nations. He manifested himself to Job, and taught him "that his Redeemer liveth," and moved even the prophets of Israel to predict again and again the happy

times when, "from the rising of the sun to the going down of the same, His name should be great among the Gentiles, and in every place incense should be offered to his name, and a pure offering; for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the Lord of hosts." (Mal. i. 11.) Having this word, we reject the oral law which contradicts it, and

intentionally, is to be put to death." (Hilchoth Rotzeach, c. v. 3.) The written law, on the contrary, says, "These six cities shall be a refuge, both for the children of Israel and for the stranger, and for the sojourner among them: that any one that killeth any person unawares may flee thither." (Numbers xxxv. 15.) Again, the oral law says

ישראל שהרג גר תושב אינו נהרג עליו בבית דין :| would make God the God of the Rabbinists

שנאמר וכי יזיד איש על רעהו •

only; and we believe in the New Testament, which exactly agrees with your written law, and asks, "Is He the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the Gentiles ?"-and answers, Yes, of the Gentiles also" (Rom. iii. 29)-and which also declares that, in the sight of God, "There is no difference between the Jew and the Greek; for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him, for whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." (Rom. x. 12, 13.)

In the fixing of the commandments, then, for the sons of Noah, we have detected an intolerant and uncharitable spirit very different from that of the Old and New Testament. But we have further to inquire, what was the extent of toleration conceded to them. We do not stop to prove that they were not allowed to possess land, nor to be judges, nor members of the Sanhedrin, nor to hold any office, nor to intermarry with the Jews. From all that, they were excluded by the law of God himself. They were allowed to sojourn in the land, and hence their name "sojourning proselytes." Further, "They were to be treated with the same courtesy and benevolence as the Israelites." (See No. 4, p. 13.) But further than this the toleration did not extend. The oral law, though it cominands "courtesy and benevolence," does not administer evenhanded justice to "the pious of the nations of the world," as may be seen from the following specimens:

|

"An Israelite who kills a sojourning Proselyte, is not put to death on his account by the tribunal, for it is said, But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour.' (Exodus xxi. 14.) The law of God says, "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.” (Gen. ix. 6.) And to this law the New Testament commands us Christians to adhere, rejecting the oral traditions; and in consequence the laws of Christian countries make no difference between the murderer of a Jew, a Christian, Turk, Infidel, or Heretic. Short as all Christian nations confessedly come of the pure morality of the New Testament, their laws direct the administration of impartial justice, and are a terror to all evil doers of every creed and sect. The liberality of the Talmud then, in allowing a share of salvation to the pious of the world is not so very great, nor its toleration of a very comprehensive character. It not only withholds justice from the pious of the world, but gives as the reason, because they are not considered as neighbours. Want of room prevents us from pursuing this subject further at present. We therefore ask, Is this law from God? Can God, in an oral law, directly contradict his written law? Can you point out any thing similar in the New Testament? Is this law just or unjust? You will grant that it is unjust and erroneous. Then your fathers have been mistaken about one of the first principles of the administration of justice, for many centuries. brethren who adhere to this system as divine, as on the Barbary coast, for instance, are still mistaken. Why do you not protest aloud

And your

ישראל שהרג בשגגה את העבד או את גר תושב גולה • וכן גר תושב שהרג את גר תושב או את העבד בשגגה גולה •

גר תושב שהרג את ישראל בשגגה אף על פי שהוא

against such error? Why not endeavour to | שגג הרי זה נהרג •

"An Israelite who unintentionally kills a slave, or a sojourning proselyte, is imprisoned (in one of the cities of refuge)."

"And so a sojourning proselyte who unintentionally kills a sojourning proselyte, or a slave, is imprisoned.'

"A sojourning proselyte who unintentionally kills an Israelite, although he did it un

You may

convince your brethren that they are wrong?
In England there is nothing to prevent you.
There is full liberty, free toleration.
lift up your voice like a trumpet against the
errors of the Talmud. You may expunge all
acknowledgment of its authority from your
prayers-you may return to Moses and the
prophets, and no man will say nay.

London:- Sold at the London Society's Office, 16, Exeter-hall, Strand; by James Duncan, Paternosterrow; and B. Wertheim, 57, Aldersgate-street. This publication may be had by applying at No. 5, No. 7, or No. 13, Palestine-place, Bethnal green.

עמדו על דרכים וראו ושאלו לנתבות עולם • ירמיה ו' טז'

"THE OLD PATHS."-JER. vi. 16.

NUMBER 9.]

FRIDAY, MARCH 11, 1836.

WE said, in our last number, that "the pious of the nations of the world are, according to the oral law, those who have received the seven commandments of the sons of Noah. We said that of the laws laid down for their own conduct, some, as for instance that respecting divorces, are such as would introduce confusion and misery into Gentile society-and that others, referring to the administration of justice by Rabbinical tribunals, are extremely unjust. But the advocates of the oral law think, nevertheless, that it is very tolerant, more tolerant than the New Testament, because it says that "the pious of the nations of the world have a share in the world to come." Now we cannot help feeling a curiosity to know how great or how small that share will be. And this our curiosity is excited by the following information, which the oral law commands to be communicated to a Gentile who wishes to turn Jew:

་

[PRICE ONE-PENNY.

waxed fat and kicked.' The Holy One,
blessed be he, brings upon them the abund-
ance of afflictions for no other reason than
this, that they may not be lost. All the na-
tions shall be utterly destroyed, but they shall
abide." (Hilchoth Issure Biah., c. xiv. 3-5.)
To us this sounds very much like a flat con-
tradiction to the above declaration, that "the
pious of the nations of the world have a share
in the world to come.' Here, on the con-
trary, it is stated that the blessings of that
state are reserved "for none but the righteous,
and they are Israel;" and again, all the
nations shall be utterly destroyed." And it
is even implied that the nations get their good
things in this world, and do not suffer afflic-
tion, as they are not to have that blessedness,
which is reserved for the righteous. How,
then, are we to reconcile these two sayings?
There are only two ways which occur to us,
either by saying that this is not strictly true,
but only a fair speech in order to catch pro-
selytes; or, if it be strictly true, that then
"the pious of the world" are to have a much

In

any case the spirit is far from charitable or

persons, saving Israelites simply because they

וכשם שמודיעין אותו עונשן של מצות כך מודיעין אותו .smaller share in the blessedness to come | שכרן של מצות ומודיעין אותו שבעשית מצות אלו יזכה

לחיי העולם הבא • ושאין שום צדיק גמור אלא בעל tolerant. It represents God as an acceptor of | החכמ' שעושה ויודען : ואומרין לו הוי יודע שהעולם הבא אינו צפון אלא לצדיקים והם ישראל • וזה שתראה are Israelites, and destroying the other nations | ישראל בצער בעולם הזה טובה היא צפונה להם שאין because they are not Israelites. The New | יכולין לקבל רוב טובה בעולם הזה כאומות • שמא ירום ,Testament representation is very different | לבם ויתעו ויפסידו שכר העולם הבא כענין שנאמר וישמן and far more worthy of * The Judge of all | ישורון ויבעט : ואין הקדוש ברוך הוא מביא עליהן רוב פורענות כדי שלא יאבדו אלא כל האומות כלין והן עומדין

וגו'

"As they are to make known to him the punishments attached to the commandments, so they are also to inform him of the rewards for keeping them. They should inform him, that, by the doing of these commandments, he will be worthy of everlasting life; and that there is no perfectly righteous man, except that possessor of wisdom who does and knows them. And they are to say to him, Be assured that the world to come is laid up for none but the righteous, and they are Israel; and as to this that thou seest Israel in trouble in this world, their good things are laid up for them, for they cannot receive an abundance of good things in this world, like the nations. Their heart might, perchance, be lifted up, and they might go astray, and lose the reward of the world to come, as it is said, 'Jeshurun

of

the earth." It does indeed say, "He that
believeth shall be saved, and he that believeth
not shall be damned." But in this very de-
claration, we have an impartial rule applied
to all mankind.
"He that believeth,'
whatsoever nation, kindred, or tongue-Jew
or Gentile, white or black" shall be saved."
"He that believeth not," whether he be
called a Jew or a Christian, whether he be a
son of Japhet, of Shem, or of Ham, "shall
be damned." The New Testament asserts
no monopoly of salvation for one favoured
family. It excludes none because he had not
the happiness to be descended from a privi-
leged stock. It lays down a general and im-
partial rule to be applied to all the children of
men.
The oral law says,

כל ישראל יש להם חלק לעולם הבא

"All Israel has a share in the world to
come." The New Testament says,
"Not
every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord,

D

אי זה הוא גר תושב זה גוי שקבל עליו שלא יעבוד עכ'ום | cause of their disobedience. In this case, then עם שאר המצות שנצטוו בני נח ולא מל ולא טבל הרי זה

מקבלין אותו והוא מחסידי אומות העולם • ולמה נקרא He gives every nation a fair trial, and שמו תושב לפי שמותר לנו להושיבו בינינו בארץ ישראל | if they refuse to hearken to his voice, he pours כמו שבארנו בהלכות עכ'ום : ואין מקבלין גר תושב אלא | out upon them his wrath. The rise, and בזמן שהיובל נוהג

in the land of Israel, as we have explained in the laws concerning idolatry. But a sojourn ing proselyte is not received EXCEPT DUR

ING THE CELEBRATION OF THE JU

| lieve that those who make this defence are
unacquainted with the principles of the system
which they undertake to defend. The truth
is, that the authors of the oral law, finding
that they could not altogether deny salvation
to the pious of other nations, were determined
not to add to their number, and therefore
limited the possibility of this mode of conver-
sion to times that had elapsed long before
they were born. But in their own times they
would not receive any one who was not will-
ing to be circumcised and to receive the whole
law. And hence we see how exactly the New
Testament represents the state of the case,
when Christianity was first propagated
amongst the Gentiles, and free salvation was
proclaimed to all who believed, without be-

BILEE." (Hilchoth Issure Biah. c. xiv. 7, 8.)
During the other forty-nine years the unfortu-
nate heathen might perish, if they did not
choose to become Jews altogether. Now was
this charitable? Was it tolerant ? What
use was there in talking of the liberality of the
Talmudic law during these forty-nine years?
The Rabbinist might say, We grant that the
pious of the nations may be saved; and a
Gentile might answer, Well, I am willing to
become one of the pious; I wish to be saved;
receive me.
The Rabbinist would answer,
Nay, you must wait until the year of Jubilee.
The Gentile might urge, there are eight-and-coming Jewish proselytes. The Rabbinists
forty years to pass away before that; in the
meanwhile I must die, for I am already old,
and if I die, I must be lost. The Rabbinist
could only reply, I cannot help you, unless
you will consent to be circumcised and turn
Jew. But what will be thought of the cha-
rity of this law if we add, that there has been
no jubilee, and consequently no pious amongst
the nations for two thousand seven hundred
years and more? Yet this is what the oral
law tells us.

opposed with all their might. "And certain
men which came down from Judea taught the
brethren and said, Except ye be circumcised
after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be
saved." And again, "There rose up certain
of the sect of the Pharisees which believed,
saying that if was needful to circumcise them,
and to command them to keep the law of
Moses." (Acts xv. 1-5.) It was not the
year of jubilee, and therefore renunciation of
idolatry was not sufficient in the eyes of these
traditionists, who believed that at such a time
there was no salvation except for those who

משגלה שבט ראובן ושבט גד וחצי שבט מנשה בטלו ?observed the whole law. But how is it now | הובלות שנאמר וקראתם דרור בארץ לכל יושביה • בזמן If a Gentile should desire now to become one | שכל יושביה עליה • והוא שלא יהיו מעורבבין שבט בשבט -of the pious of the nations, could the Jews re | אלא כולן יושבים כתקנן •

"Since the time that the tribe of Reuben, ceive him? According to the above general and the tribe of Gad and the half-tribe of principles, certainly not. The tribes are still Manasseh were led away captive, the ju- scattered and mixed up together. The land bilees have ceased, for it is said, And ye has not got "all its inhabitants." There can shall proclaim liberty throughout the land be no jubilee, and therefore those that wish to unto all the inhabitants thereof,' (Lev. xxv. be saved, must, according to the oral law, turn 10); that means, when all its inhabitants are Jews, or take their chance of living to a year upon it, and moreover when the tribes are not of jubilee. But we are not necessitated to mixed one with another, but all dwelling argue from the principles. The thing is according as they were appointed." (Hilchoth expressly laid down in the oral law. After Shemitah, c. x. 8.) We have the account of explaining, as we have quoted above, who are this captivity in the following words, "In the pious of the world, and that the year of those days the Lord began to cut Israel short: jubilee is the only time for receiving them, it and Hazael smote them in all the coasts of addsIsrael: from Jordan eastward, all the land of

אבל בזמן הזה אפילו קבל עליו כל התורה כולה חוץ | Gilead, the Gadites, and the Reubeniten, art מדקדוק אחד אין מקבלין אותו :

the Manassites." (2 Kings x. 32, 33.) That was, according to the common chronology, about 884 years before the Christian era. If to this we add 1836, we have 2720 years since the time that there could be a jubilee, and consequently 2720 years since any Gentiles were converted from the errors of idolatry to the religion of the sons of Noah. What is it then but solemn mockery, in any one acquainted with the oral law, to tell us that the Talmud is tolerant, and admits that the pious of the nations of the world may be saved;" when according to that same book seven-and-twenty centuries have elapsed, since any such converts were received ? We be

"But in the present time, though a man should be willing to take upon him the whole law with the exception of only one of its least requirements, he is not to be received." Now then what becomes of the boasted toleration of the Talmud? It says that the pious of the nations of the world may be saved." But it says, first, that such converts can only be received once in fifty years. It says, secondly, than even those scanty opportunities have not occurred for the last 2700 years; and, lastly, it positively forbids the Jews in the present time to give the Gentiles a chance of salvation, unless they are willing to receive the whole