How do Christians respond to Jewish skeptics who argue that God would not want them to break the Old Law without 100% certainty?

Many Jews claim that if God wanted them to stop observing the Old Law He would have made it more obvious that this was the case, in fact He would have given them some kind of deductive knowledge that this was the case because otherwise they would be left in grave uncertainty as to how to obey God The mere claim that God gave commandments does not actually require that much evidence to be reasonably accepted since there is no worthwhile alternative to it, however the claim of progressive revelation would seem to require a much higher degree of evidence, even certainty. As you can see, they are not just being skeptics, for example, they could admit that the argument for the resurrection is pretty substantial, but they would refuse to accept it because it is merely inductive, saying maybe it would be a good reason to reject Deism but not Judaism. **How do Christian apologists respond to this argument?**