The judeo-christian polemic between the Karaite scholar Isaac Ben Abraham Troki and the protestant theologian Marcin Czechowic in the book Hizzuq ’Emuna

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

The judeo-christian polemic between the Karaite scholar Isaac Ben Abraham Troki and the protestant theologian Marcin Czechowic in the book Hizzuq 'Emuna

Veronika Klimova

PhD, adjunct at Adam Mickiewicz University, Poland

Abstract

The aim of the research.The article focuses on the analysis of the polemic between the Karaite Judaism - characterized by the recognition of the written Law of Moses and rejection of the Talmud - and Christianity - the most widely practiced religion in the Polish-Lithuanian territories of Eastern Europe. The research methodology is based on the search and comprehensive study of primary sources on the religious history of Eastern Europe. The Scientific Novelty.The study on the Judeo-Christian polemic between Isaac ben Abraham Troki and Marcin Czechowic is significant for reconstructing the religious life of Karaites and their relations with Christians in Polish-Lithuanian society. The Conclusions. The article confirms that the Karaite scholar and polemical writer Isaac Troki, who was well acquainted with Polish and Latin theological literature, succeeded in demonstrating the author's creed and exegetic skills in contrast to Catholic and Protestant beliefs. In response to anti-Jewish accusations as a result of strong differences in the understanding of God 's law, the Karaite author managed to disprove the allegations and wrote "Hizzuq 'Emuna”, where he questioned Christian dogmas. The analysis of the historical and theological aspects of "Hizzuq 'Emuna” through the lens of Polish Protestant reformer Marcin Czechowic's book "Christian Conversations (Pol. Rozmowy Christanskie)” lead to the conclusion that strong critical writing against Jews paradoxically contributed to the spread of Karaite dogmas among Protestant scholars.

Key words: Karaite literature, Isaac ben Abraham Troki, Marcin Czechowic.

Анотація

karaite judaism christianity troki czechowic

ЮДЕО-ХРИСТИЯНСЬКА ПОЛЕМІКА КАРАЇМСЬКОГО ВЧЕНОГО ІСААКА ТРОЦЬКОГО ТА ПРОТЕСТАНТСЬКОГО ТЕОЛОГА МАРТІНА ЧЕХОВІЦА В КНИЗІ ХІЗЗУК ЕМУНА

Мета cmammi - проаналізувати полеміку між караїмським іудаїзмом, який ґрунтується на визнанні письмового Закону Мойсея і відкиданні Талмуду, та найбільш широко розповсюдженою релігією на польсько-литовських територіях Східної Європи - християнством. Методологія дослідження базується на пошуку та всебічному вивченні першоджерел релігійної історії Східної Європи. Наукова новизна. Дослідження юдео-християнської полеміки між

Ісааком бен Авраамом Трокі та Мартіном Чеховіцем є важливим для реконструкції релігійного життя караїмів та їхніх стосунків із християнами у польсько-литовському суспільстві. Висновки. У статті стверджується, що караїмському вченому та полемічному письменникові Ісааку бен Аврааму Трокі, який добре знався на польській та латинській богословській літературі, вдалося продемонструвати авторське кредо та екзегетичні навички щодо католицьких і протестантських вірувань. У відповідь на антиєврейські звинувачення внаслідок значних розбіжностей у розумінні закону Бога караїмський автор спростував звинувачення і написав книгу "Хіззук емуна”, де поставив під сумнів християнські догми. Аналіз історичних та богословських аспектів "Хіззук емуна” крізь призму книги польського протестантського реформатора Мартіна Чеховіца "Християнські розмови” (польською "RozmowyChristianskie”) показує, що критична література щодо євреїв значно посприяла поширенню караїмських догматів серед протестантських учених.

Ключові слова: караїмська література, Ісаак Троцький, Мартін Чеховіц.

The Problem Statement

The Karaites of Eastern Europe have a peculiar historical fate. For centuries, they have contributed their share to the treasury of European spiritual and religious wealth, remaining an exceptional sect of followers of the pure Mosaic doctrine without recognizing the Talmud. The publication of the work of Hizzuq 'Emuna by Isaac ben Abraham Troki (1533 - 1594) stirred up the Christian world and undoubtedly caused an increase in Judeo-Christian controversy. The study of this extremely sensitive topic is marked by formidable religious contradictions, so its objective study in the context of Christian literature will help to restore the integrity of historical memory.

The Analysis of Recent Researches and Publications.The biography and legacy of the Karaite scholar Isaac Troki is covered in the studies of Jacob Mann (Mann, 1933), Isaac Si- nani (Sinani, 1890), Golda Akhiezer (Akhiezer, 2007), Ratal Witkowski (Witkowski, 2007) and Mariusz Pawelec (Pawelec, 2009). In particular, Mann published valuable manuscripts from the collection of Abraham Firkowicz, which contain biographical information about the scholar. Akhiezer made a critical analysis of the discourse of the Karaite-rabbinic polemics of Isaac Troki. The topic of Judeo-Christian polemics of Protestant reformer Marcin Czechowic regarding the vulnerability of Jews and Christians to the question raised has remained in a dusty corner, mostly untouched by researchers.

The purpose of the article is to study the features of the Judeo-Christian controversy between Karaite scholar Isaac Troki and Christian reformer Marcin Czechowic on the basis of the book Hizzuq 'Emuna by Isaac Troki.

The Statement of the Basic Material.The name of Isaac ben Abraham Troki is immortalized in Karaite literature, and his activity is closely linked to the cultural life of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and in the background of various confessional mosaics in the Commonwealth. The future theologian, polemicist, writer and poet was born in Troki in 1533 and died there in 1594 Jacob Mann suggested that Mordecai ben Nisan, who lived a hundred years later, indicated a false date of death in 1594, and that according to Zerah ben Nathan, it should fall to 1586. Accordingly, the years of life must also be shifted to eight years, ie the date of birth is 1525 (Mann, 1972, pp. 591, 726-727, 1181-1187, 1475).. Due to the absence of credible historical sources, except for his three letters written to Isaac son of Israel from 1558 and to Galician hazzan Judah son of Aaron for the period 1581 - 1583, some biographical information from his own book Hizzuq 'Emuna and the book Dod Mordekay by Mordecai ben Nisan (grandson of Simha, brother of Isaac), the life of Isaac Troki remains a mystery. He is known to have studied Scripture and Hebrew literature under the guidance of Zephaniah son of Mordecai, whose name was certified by the hazzan in Troki in 1528. He studied in Christian schools where he mastered Latin and Polish. The profession of doctor was probably acquired in the medical department of a Christian educational institution. In 1553, at the age of about 20 At the age of 28 according to the early dates of life (Mann, 1972, pp. 769-790 (Proceedings of the Assembly of the Karaites of Troki (1553 C. E., ratified in 1568 C. E.) [2. Firkowicz Collection, No. 221, marked 85-87]), 591, 1475., Isaac was appointed secretary of the Lithuanian Karaite Council (similar to the rabbinic Va'ad Medinat Lita). On this occasion, he was also delegated the responsibilities of a dayan (judge) in beit-din and in conjunction with the shofet for one year. Isaac was married, but apparently did not have children, as he addressed his will to his wife, several brothers, and student Joseph ben Mordecai Malinowski (Sinani, 1890, p. 164; Bersohn, 1905, pp. 72-73; Szczucki, 1961, pp. 132-133; Zaj^czkowski, 1962, pp. 193-194; Mann, 1972, pp. 591-592, 715; Schreier, 2002, pp. 65-66; Pawelec, 2009, pp. 3-4; Witkowski, 2007, p. 62; Akhiezer, 2007, pp. 438-439; Nemoy, 2007, pp. 155-156).

The immortal legacy of Isaac Troki's Hizzuq 'Emuna (Strengthening of the Faith) is considered one of the highest pinnacles of Judeo-Christian polemical literature. Even as a young man he was a well-educated person and author participated in numerous religious discussions, refuting anti-Jewish accusations and demonstrating a deep ethical conviction of the truth of the Jewish faith. However, only at the end of his life did he begin to record his views, thoughts, and arguments, giving his work the form of a coherent text that earned him recognition and fame. An unexpected death prevented him from completing his writing, but his student and successor, the aforementioned Joseph Malinowski from Troki, was able to finish the work, edit the text, and compile an index It should be emphasized that Simha Isaac Lutski claimed that Isaac Troki also wrote two works on the Karaite ritual law “Qiddus ha-hodes” (“Sanctifation of the New Moon”) and “Hilkot sehita” (“Rules of Ritual Slaughter”). “Qiddus ha-hodes” focuses on the theme of the new moon, an important component of the technique for obtaining the Karaite religious calendar, with reference to the work of Gan 'Eden (Garden of Eden) by Aaron the Younger of Nicomedia. “Hilkot sehita” is written in the form of questions and answers about the rules of animal slaughter. In addition, Isaac Troki wrote several religious hymns that were part of a prayer book published in Vilnius in 1892 (Pawelec, 2009, p. 4). The text is not fully translated, often paraphrased by the author..

The printed edition of Hizzuq 'Emuna first appeared as a Latin translation, prepared by orientalist and polyhistor, professor at the University of Altdorf, Johann Christoph Wagenseil. He included it in his work Tela Ignea Satanae. Hoc estarcani et horribiles Judaeoru- mad versus Christum Deum et Christianam religionem libri (Flaming Arrows of Satan, that is, the secret and horrible books of the Jews against Christ, God, and the Christian religion), published in 1681 in Altdorf. Translations into English (Faith Strengthened⁴, trans. Moses Mocatta (London: Privately printed, 1851)), German (Befestigungim Glauben,trans. David Deutsch (Sohrau: Selbstverlag des Herausgebers, 1865)), and Spanish (trans. Isaac Attias (Hamburg, 1621)), Dutch (trans. Daniel de la Pania (1729)), French (Rotterdam, 1730) and Portuguese (Shelomoh Benvenisti, end of the eighteenth century) languages subsequently appeared in European religious literature (Akhiezer, 2007, p. 437).

When working on Hizzuq 'Emuna, Isaac Troki realized that he wrote in the period of a most turbulent religious controversy on Polish lands between various Christian currents, and considered it a personal duty to advocate for the Jewish religion. It was unacceptable him that Christian theologians would spread hostile ideas against the Jews, who did not confess Jesus Christ. The polemical work consists of two parts, which are respectively divided into fifty and hundred sections. In each of these, the author presents a question from a Christian scholar and gives an answer-some examples: “Why do Jews not believe in Jesus as the Messiah?” or “Does Jesus deny requirements involved in keeping Kosher?” or “Does a stay in exile not confirm the fact that Jesus is the Messiah?” or “Will Israel not be restored after the destruction of the Second Temple?”.

Isaac Troki undoubtedly studied Karaite literature thoroughly, read the Talmud and rabbinic literature (by Saadia Gaon (882 - 942), Maimonides (1135 - 1204), Judah Halevi (1050 - 1141), Judah HeHasid (1150 - 1217) and Rashi (1040 - 1105)), but this knowledge was not enough in order to make persuasive arguments. The Karaite author became acquainted with the works of anti-Trinitarian authors who denied the dogma of the Holy Trinity: Nic- colф Paruta (153? - 1581), Marcin Czechowic (1532 - 1613), Szymon Budny (1530 - 1593) and Marcin Bielski (1495 - 1575). It additionally enabled him to use the “logical arguments” of anti-Trinitarian theologians against them (Witkowski, 2007, pp. 63-64; Schreier, 2002, pp. 68-69) and to emphasize the complexity and contradiction of the entire Christian world (Isaac Troki, 1705, pp. 31-32):

In our generation, there are already many theologians from so-called in their language the Ebionite sect, the Socinian sect, and the Arian sect, who have split into two sects: Calvinist and Lutheran. They acknowledge the oneness of God, blessed be He, and reject the doctrine of the Trinity. This is exactly what the theologian Niccolф Paruta wrote in his book, composed in the Latin language about the unity of the Creator, may He be blessed, called in their language De Uno Vero Deo, in which he explains „the oneness of God”. Similarly, the theologian Marcin Czechowic in his book Rozmowy `Conversations', written in Polish, in the second chapter rejected the view of the Trinitarians, relying on strong evidence from Scripture and brain. And also in his book entitled Three Days from page 28 to page 67 he invalidated all the evidence of Trinitarians which they took from the Gospel. Also, many theologians from the above mentioned sects - each in his book - have completely denied all the evidences of Trinitarians, and that is enough for this case.

Protestant theologian Marcin Czechowic was at the head of the Socinian movement of the community of anti-Trinitarians in Lublin, the so-called Ecclesia Minor. In 1575 he published in Cracow Rozmowy Christianskie. Ktore z greckiego nдzwiskд, Diвlogвmi zowiq (Christian Conversations, called in Greek Dialogues) between a teacher and a student, and proclaimed a readiness for martyrdom for faith, renunciation of private property, and humility in the face of persecution. While teaching that a Christian's life should be characterized by faith, hope, love, humility, kindness, truth, justice, Czechowic did not restrain himself in critical and abusive statements about Jews: “stubborn Jews (vporni zydowie)”, “unfaithful Jews (niewierni zydowie)”, “freaky Jews (zydowie tak wykrзtni)”, “foolish fleshly Jews (glupi cielefni zydowie)”, “Jewish loot (zydowlkie brednie)” (Czechowic, 1575, pp. 30, 67, 76, 116, 122). He tried to prove that the Jews' denial of Jesus as the Messiah was unfounded, and though they studied the Scriptures, they did not understand it because they did not ask God for understanding. Czechowic condemned some rabbis who claimed “many false gossips about our New Testament and about our Lord Jesus Christ (plotek wiele klamliwych o nowym nalzym teltamencie y o nalzym Panie Iezulie Chriftufie)” (Czechowic, 1575, p. 70), and stated that “it is a hard thing for a Christian to convert a Jew, and I do not know if it is more difficult than to teach a wolf not to kill sheep or a cat not to catch mice (Trudna to ielt rzecz Zyda Chriltiвninowi nawrocic a niewiem by nietrudnieyfza niz wilkв od mordowвnia owiec вbo kotв od chwytвnia myfzy oduczyc)” (Czechowic, 1575, p. 67).

Isaac Troki categorically denied all the allegations made towards the Jews. Based on the ideas of Czechowic, he rejected the doctrine of the divinity of Jesus, considering him only a perfect man. Although most Christian theologians, on the basis of Gen. 1:26, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness^{5 All biblical verses have been taken from the King James Bible.}

⁶ In printed copies of Hizzuq 'Emuna, the word God is recorded as 'Eloqim. This article uses Biblical quotes from Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, which is why the word God is written as 'Elohim.

⁷ In printed copies of Hizzuq 'Emuna, the word God is recorded as 'Eloaq. This article uses Biblical quotes from Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, which is why the word God is written as 'Eloah.”, explain the doctrine of Trinitarianism, the Polish theologian in the section “About Jesus Christ (O Iezufie Chriltufie)” rejected the Holy Trinity dogma by explaining the names of God 'Elohim and 'Adonay in the light of the New Testament in terms of grammar and logic; in his opinion, none of the names testified to the existence of the Triune God as three persons. Isaac Troki refuted the view of the plurality of God from the plural verb na 'ase (let us make) on the basis of the following verse Gen. 1:27, “God created man in his own image”, where the verb appeared in the singular “and [He] created” and “in his own image”, and not “and [They] created” and “in their own image” as might be expected. Without conceding or believing the grammatical arguments to be persuasive, the Karaite author presented a whole list of biblical verses that proved the absolute oneness of God: “Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the LORD he is God ( 'Elohim⁶); there is none else beside him” (Deut. 4:35), “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God ('Eloheynu) is one LORD” (Deut. 6: 4), “I, even I ( 'Anoki), am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviouf' (Isa. 43:11), “O LORD, there is none like thee, neither is there any God {'Elohim) beside thee” (1 Chron. 17:20) (Isaac Troki, 1705, pp. 29-30; Czechowic, 1575, pp. 16-17).

The use of the plural in the word God ( 'Elohim) was explained by the Karaite author that the word signified not only the Most High, but also angels and human authority (Czechowic, 1575, pp. 14-15). In the story of the birth of Samson after the departure of the angel, Manoah told his wife that “we have seen God ( 'Elohim)”, calling the messenger of God - the angel of the Lord (Mal'ak 'Adonay) - the name of God ('Elohim) (Judg. 13:21-22); in the laws on compensation, the obligation was to bring a case before God when it concerned human authority: “the master of the house shall be brought unto the judges ( ''Elohim)” (Ex. 22:8). The question still remains unresolved in the consideration of the speech of the Almighty to Moses, when He said, “I have made thee a god ('Elohim) to Pharaoh” (Ex. 7:1) (Isaac Troki, 1705, p. 113).

In the Scriptures, besides the word God ( 'Elohim) in the plural, the word God ( 'Eloah⁷) appears in the singular. In the Bible one can find: “he [Jeshurun] forsook God ( 'Eloah) which made him” (Deut. 32:15), “consider this, ye that forget God ('Eloah)'”(Ps. 50:22), “Is there a God ('Eloah) beside me?” (Isa. 44:8). Numerous use of the word 'Eloah in the singular refutes the consideration of the plural 'Elohim as an argument of faith in the Trinity (Isaac Troki, 1705, p. 29).

Similar grammatical arguments were used in the analysis of Isa. 7:14, “Behold, a virgin (ha-'alma) shall conceive”. Isaac Troki stated that in the above verse, the word ha-'alma means a young woman, not a virgin or maiden, as is customary in Christianity. The author explained that in Hebrew, there were two expressions han-na'ara and ha-'alma used to delineate a girl or a virgin and a married woman, such as: “And let it come to pass, that the damsel (han-na'ara) to whom I shall say” (Gen. 24:14) and “when the virgin (han-na'ara) cometh forth to draw watef' (Gen. 24:43). In some cases, the word han-na'ara was used to describe a girl: “And the damsel (han-na'ara) ran, and told them of her mother's house these things” (Gen. 24:28), and in other cases to describe a married (young) woman: “Whose damsel (han-na'ara) is this?” (Ruth 2:5). According to Isaac Troki, a similar analogy can be applied to the word ha-'alma, which may refer to a girl: “the maid (ha-'alma) went and called the child's mothef' (Ex. 2:8), just like the young wife (Isaac Troki, 1705, p. 47).

The Karaite author presented the historical background of the verse when, during the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, an army of king Rezin of Aram, along with an army of king Pekah of Israel, went against Jerusalem. To add to the courage and bravery of Ahaz, God sent the prophet Isaiah, who announced that Jerusalem would not be conquered and that Samaria and Damascus would be devastated. Isaac Troki believed that the fact of Ahaz's inclusion in the prophecy of the birth of Jesus or inclusion of the birth of Jesus in the prophecy of Ahaz's victory seemed counter-intuitive. Isaiah prophesied of the misfortunes that would come upon the hated kings for sixty-five years: “For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people” (Isa. 7:8) which had its beginning not immediately after their proclamation, but after the birth of the prophet's son.

According to the Karaite scholar, during the prophecy, Isaiah's young wife became pregnant and gave birth to a son, who was firstly given the name 'Immanu 'El (God with us), and then called Maher salal has baz (Make haste to take away the prey⁸) : “For before the child shall have knowledge to cry, my father, and my mother, the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria shall be taken away before the king of Assyria” (Isa. 8:4). At the same time, it should be emphasized that the Christian theologian Czechowic focused on the analysis of the meaning of the words young maiden (ha-'alma) and virgin (betula) and drew attention to the use of the definite article (ha-): “Teacher. And how do those who explain Isaiah's wife and son prove it? Student. Based on what is written in section 8:3 below, we have that the prophet Isaiah himself says that he approached her or to the same (since there is also a definite article (ha-), as in the above section 7:14 ha-'alma). “She conceived, and bore a son” indicated that it was a prophetess - his wife (NAVCZYCIEL. A czymze tego dowodz^ ci ktorzy to o zenie y fynu Ezaiaizowym wykladai^.VCZEN. Tym co potym w kap: 8. f 3. napifano mamy gdzie tak fam Ezaiafz Prorok mowi y przyft^pilem do teyabo do oney (bo tez takze ielt tam artykul Haiedia iako y wyzfzey kap. 7. f 14. ha Alma). Proroki- niy poczзlay v rodzila fyna: przez ktorз Prorokini^ zonз iego rozumiei^)” (Isaac Troki, 1705, pp. 47-49; Czechowic, 1575, p. 134).

Isaac Troki tried to convince his readers that the Law of Moses was not temporary, there was no limited period before the arrival of Jesus from Nazareth. The author denied that Jesus abolished the law of Moses and gave his followers new commandments. In doing so, he rejected the Christians' explanation that the Sinai commandments and prohibitions were characterized by high rigor, and their fulfillment turned out to be a completely or partially impossible task, as it was written in Matt. 5:17-18: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled” (Isaac Troki, 1705, p. 44).

The Karaite author paid special attention to observing the weekly peace day of Shabbat abolished by Christians. In his understanding, it is completely illogical to deny the persuasive arguments of Scripture, to change the correct interpretation of the text, seeking evidence for the benefit of the Sunday, and to persuade those who firmly believe to accept the possibility of breaking the commandment of God which says that the seventh day is a Shabbat for the Lord (Isaac Troki, 1705, p. 45). However, the voices of the Apostolic Fathers were stronger and, as Czechowic himself wrote, a new meaning and new vision was implemented in the Shabbat (Czechowic, 1575, pp. 70-71):⁸ Translation from Douay-Rheims Bible.

It is worth mentioning that during the Council of Laodicea of the Christian Church, which took place around 336 and laid down the basic rules of church administration and Christian piety, observing the Shabbat was cancelled (Geiermann, 1934, p. 50). Isaac Troki, referring to the book by rabbi David Gans Semah David, mentioned this Council, though he mistook the date of its holding, and expressed his dissatisfaction with the holiness of the Sunday accepted in the Christian world (Isaac Troki, 1705, p. 45):

that the Torah did not annul its words even after the time of Jesus, who himself and all of his disciples kept the Shabbat, and five hundred years after Jesus the Pope came and commanded to observe Sunday instead of the Shabbat, as explained in the chronicle Semah David. Therefore the Shabbat day is holy itself by God's power, and not just for the sake of rest, as is customary to think. As the scripture says, “See, for that the LORD hath given you the Shabbat, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days” (Ex. 16:29).

Undoubtedly, the decision to abolish the sanctification of the Shabbat was unacceptable to Isaac Troki as much as the decision to abolish the circumcision, which was a sign of a covenant between God and the people of Israel. He could not accept the words of Czechowic that “it is revealed in the word of God that circumcision, like Shabbat, finds its end in Christ, and is unnecessary for believers (to flowem Bozym okazano bзdzie iz obrzefka iako y fzabat iuz fwoy koniec w Chriftufie wziзla a iz iuz wierz^cym nic nie ieft pozyteczna)” (Czechowic, 1575, p. 73), and he agreed as to the new one - meaning the circumcision of the “foreskin of your heart” (Deut. 10:16). Isaac Troki underlined the fact of such practices' existence in the apostolic times, and recalled the story of Timothy from the New Testament. It is well-known that the apostle Paul circumcised Timothy, the son of a Jewish mother and a Greek father, according to Jewish tradition, so that they both could proclaim the gospel among the Jews who were aware of his Greek lineage in the paternal line: “Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek” (Acts 16:1-3). And to the rhetorical question posed by Czechowic: “Let the unbelieving Jews, Turks and Tatars circumcise themselves as they wish, and what is it to us? (Niechay lie iako chc^ niewiemi zydowie Turcy y Tatarzy obrzezui^ na ciele a co nam do tego?)” (Czechowic, 1575, p. 76) Isaac Troki wrote that if, after the death of Jesus, circumcision had taken place, then this requirement of the Law of Moses could not get outdated and remained relevant to today's society.

The Conclusions

In summary, it should be pointed out that the controversial work Hizzuq 'Emuna by Isaac Troki is a most striking example of the defence of the Jewish religion.

Through his personal efforts, the Karaite scholar was independent in the study of the Holy Scriptures, skillfully displaying his knowledge of both the New Testament and Christian literature. Marcin Czechowic's total rejection of Judaism and his religious intolerance could not leave Isaac Troki indifferent. Troki not only acquainted himself with the accusations made against Jews, but he also responded to them without fear, showing his exceptional rhetorical skills.

He dared to assure readers in the supremacy of Judaism by the light of the Karaite doctrine, and also worked toward the refutation of Christian dogmas by the words of the same anti-Trinitarian writer.

It is hoped that further literary critical analysis of Hizzuq 'Emuna will enter into the essence of Judeo-Christian discussion and to recreate a fuller historical understanding of Polish religious society in the sixteenth century.

One Christian scholar asked me, saying to me: “Why do you, Jews, not want to believe that Jesus Christ was the Messiah, testified by true prophets, in whose words you also believe?”

And this was my answer to him: how do we believe he was the Messiah after you have no real proof in the prophecies, as the verses given in the Gospel from prophets do not prove that Jesus Christ was the Messiah ...

We have much real evidence to demonstrate that Jesus was not the Messiah at all. Let's mention some of them: 1) his genealogy; 2) his actions; 3) his era; 4) non-fulfillment of the promises destined for the life of the expected Messiah during his lifetime. These components are compulsory conditions to believe in the true Messiah. In fact, according to the genealogy, Jesus did not refer to the lineage of David, as he was born not of Joseph, just as witnessed in your Gospel. According to what has been written in the first chapter of Matthew, Jesus was born of Mary, who was a virgin and whom Joseph did not know until she gave birth to Jesus. Therefore nothing links the lineage of Joseph to Jesus. The lineage of Mary is also unknown to them, and even the lineage of Joseph to David is not truthful...

Appendix (fragments from Hizzuq 'Emuna (Isaac Troki, 1705, pp. 12-14))

Bibliography

1. Akhiezer, Golda. (2007). The Karaite Isaac ben Abraham of Troki and his Polemics against Rabbanites. In Tradition, Heterodoxy and Religious Culture: Judaism and Christianity in the Early Modern Period, ed. Chanita Goodblatt and Howard Kreisel, (pp. 437-468). Beer Sheva. [in English] Bersohn, Mathias. (1905). Troki Izaak (Karaita). In Slownik biograficzny uczonych Zydow Polskich [Biographical Dictionary ofthe Polish Jews]. (pp. 72-73). Warszawa: Piotr Laskauer i S-ka. [in Polish] Czechowic, Marcin. (1575). Rozmowy Christanskie. Ktore z greckiego nдzwiskд, Didlogdmi zowiq [The Christian Conversation that are Called Dialogues in Greek].Krakow: drukarnia A. Rodecki, 268 p. [in Polish]

2. Isaac ben Abraham Troki. (1705). Hizzuq 'Emuna [Faith Strenghened].Amsterdam, 124 p. [in Hebrew]

3. Mann, Jacob. (1972). Texts and Studies in Jewish History and Literature. Vol. 2. New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1596 p. [in English]

4. Nemoy, Leon. (2007). Troki, Isaac ben Abraham. Encyclopaedia Judaica(vol. 2, pp. 155-156). Detroit-New York. [in English]

5. Pawelec, Mariusz. (2009). Postac Izaaka syna Abrahama z Trok w obszarze kultury polskiej [The Image of Isaac ben Abraham Troki in the Area of Polish Culture]. Awazymyz, 3 (24),3-6. [in Polish] Schreier, S. (2002). Isaac of Troki's Studies of Rabbinic Literature, Polin, (15),65-66. [in English] Sinani, Isaac. (1890). Istoriya vozniknoveniya i razvitia karaimizma [The History of the Origin and Development of Karaim].Vol. II. St. Petersburg: Tipografiya Doma Prizren. Maloletn. Bednykh, Ligovka, 296 p. [in Russian]

6. Szczucki, L. (1961). Izaak ben Abraham z Trok. Filozofia w Polsce. Slownikpisarzy [Philosophy in Polsce. Dictionary of Writers], ed. B. Baczko, A. Przymusiala (pp. 132-133). Wroclaw. [in Polish] Witkowski, RafaJ. (2007). Izaak z Trok, syn Abrahama, karaimski uczony z XVI wieku [Isaac ben Abraham Troki, the 16th Century Karaite Scholar]. Almanach karaimski, (1),59-69. [in Polish]

7. Zaj^czkowski, WJodzimierz. (1962). Izaak syn Abrahama z Trok (1533 - 1594). Polski Slownik Biograficzny [Polish Biographical Dictionary]. Vol. 10. Krakow, 193-194. [in Polish]

Размещено на Allbest.ru