monetary value, and is worth preserving only as a sign that the money was promised and has been
paid, as we have already seen. But here you are arguing against yourself, for Muslims still keep up
the practice of circumcision, because (as they rightly say) God once enjoined it upon Abraham and
his descendants, and they think it still necessary. Hence it is evident that the Law, the Psalms,
and the Qur'an did not abrogate that command, at least in their opinion. This completely
overthrows your argument. Again, the Qur'an represents Muhammad as stating that Abraham was a Muslim
(Surah III, Al 'Imran, 60). If so, in what respect has his religion been abrogated?
73. M. Since Christ and Timothy were circumcised, how can you say the rite is not binding
C. Christ was born of a Jewish mother, and therefore He received circumcision according to
the Law of Moses. Timothy's mother (Acts xvi. 1-3) was also a Jewess, hence Paul circumcised him,
else he would not have been able to work among Jews. But this was not necessary from a Christian
point of view, for St. Paul himself says, "Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is
nothing" (1 Cor. vii. 18, 19; Rom. ii. 25-29; Phil. iii. 3).
74. M. A king can change his laws as he pleases: why should not God do so? Jesus came to
preach the Gospel peaceably, and forbade His disciples to draw the sword to spread their faith.