Yuku free message boards

My Recent Posts · (09/27/08

Tags : None

One objection I've met by a missionary is that the Jewish version of the Tanakh as read today by Jews was manipulated and changed by a group of Rabbis after the death of Jesus, in order to make the prophecies "seem unfulfilled."

Here's his objection in full:

There's a reason why Jesus doesn't fulfill the prophesies in your version of the Bible. Your Bible was deliberately altered from the original version. It's a fraud.

After the resurrection of Jesus, a group of Jewish rabbis got together and revised the Old Testament, altering prophesies that were consistent with Jesus' claims to be the Messiah. For example, the prophesy that the Messiah would be born to a virgin was removed. To add insult to injury, the rabbis threw out entire Books of the Old Testament, which are now called the Apocrypha by Protestants, and were rejected by them too when they broke away from the Catholic Church.

The Jewish version of the Old Testament is not the version read by the ancient Jews before Jesus' birth. It is a fraudulent version, deliberately altered to hide the truth that Jesus is the Messiah.

My Recent Posts · (09/27/08

Just goes to show you how desperate some people can be. Who "changed" the Chstrian OT that they also claim is the word of G-d? What was changed? By whom?

How? With so many Jews dispersed (about 70% were outside of Judah in the 1st century CE) and no modern transport HOW did they do it? I wish Chrstians make such accusations would compare the accuracy of the Torah to their own Greek Text. From Aish:

Quote:
Maintaining the accuracy of any document as ancient and as large as the Torah is very challenging even under the best of circumstances.

But consider that throughout history, Jewish communities were subject to widespread persecutions and exile. Over the last 2,000 years, Jews have been spread to the four corners of the world, from Yemen to Poland, from Australia to Alaska.

Other historical factors make the accurate transmission of the Torah all the more difficult. For example, the destruction of the Temple 1,900 years ago saw the dissolution of the Sanhedrin, the Jewish central authority which traditionally would unify the Jewish people in case of any disagreements.

Let's investigate the facts as we have them today. If we collect the oldest Torah scrolls and compare them, we can see if any garbling exists, and if so, how much.

How many letters are there in the Torah? 304,805 letters (or approximately 79,000 words).

If you were to guess, how many letters of these 304,805 do you think are in question? (Most people guess anywhere from 25 to 1,000 letters.)

The fact is, that after all the trials and tribulations, communal dislocations and persecutions, only the Yemenite Torah scrolls contain any difference from the rest of world Jewry. For hundreds of years, the Yemenite community was not part of the global checking system, and a total of nine letter-differences are found in their scrolls.

These are all spelling differences. In no case do they change the meaning of the word. For example, how would you spell the word "color?" In America, it's spelled C-O-L-O-R. But in England, it's spelled with a "u," C-O-L-O-U-R.

Such is the nature of the few spelling differences between Torah scrolls today. The results over thousands of years are remarkable!

But how impressive is this compared to other similar documents, such as the Chrstian Bible? (Both books contain approximately the same number of words.)

First of all, which would you expect to be more successful in preserving the accuracy of a text?

The Chrstian Bible. For several reasons.

First, the Christian Bible is about 1,700 years younger than the Torah. Second, the Chrstians haven't gone through nearly as much exile and dislocation as the Jews. Third, Chrstianity has always had a central authority (the Vatican) to ensure the accuracy of their text.

What are the results? The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, a book written to prove the validity of the New Testament, says: " A study of 150 Greek [manuscripts] of the Gospel of Luke has revealed more than 30,000 different readings... It is safe to say that there is not one sentence in the (sic Greek) Testament in which the [manuscript] is wholly uniform."

Other scholars report there are some 200,000 variants in the existing manuscripts of the New Testament, representing about 400 variant readings which cause doubt about textual meaning; 50 of these are of great significance.

The Torah has nine spelling variants -- with absolutely no effect on the meaning of the words. The Chrstian (GT) has over 200,000 variants and in 400 instances the variants change the meaning of the text.

The point of course is not to denigrate Chrstianity. Rather, this comparison demonstrates the remarkable accuracy of the Jewish transmission of Torah.

There has been an unbroken chain of transmission of Torah since it was given to Moses until this very time. There was never a generation since Moshe without Torah. We have the names. We know who did what and when.

This idea is SO insulting. -- the idea that we'd change Torah for ANY reason. We Jews live to fulfill Torah and here we stand accused of changing it to refute who they think is G-d? That is about as bad as the Chrstian blood libel!

Torah says "do not add to or subtract from Torah" and yet they insult us by saying we'd change it just to refute their false god???

More fodder. Torahs from around the world are remarkably the same. Torahs from ancient China. Torahs from Spain. Torahs from Europe. How, with no easy way to travel and no printng press until a few hundred years ago did the Jews "change" Torah?

There is no way with the Diaspora that such a change could have happened. I highly recommend you read Aish's article on Torah accuracy.

And don't forget Judaism has national revelation. The Muslims don't claim it. The Chrstians don't claim it.

G-d spoke to the entire nation of Israel (some 3 million of us) from Mount Sinai. Cecil B. DeMille would have you believe G-d only spoke to Moshe Rabinu -- but that is not true. G-d spoke to every single Jew.

Read Moshe's last speech in Torah where he reminds us that we were THERE and we heard G-d.

But couldn't someone "make it up" or change it (as the Muslims contend)?

How.

How do you convince someone that something happened when you aren't speaking in 3rd parties (like the GT or Koran where someone ELSE saw Jsus do the miracles or Mohammed spoke to All-h). How do convnce someone that they or their father hear G-d if it had never been mentioned until you bring it up?

How do you go up to them and say "I found this book of laws that you've never seen or heard of before, but TRUST me??"

And if you don't like the idea of "national revelation" you're going to love the concept of an unbroken chain of transmission.

There was never a generation since Moshe without Torah. We have the names. We know who did what and when. (From Aish):

Moses (1272 B.C.E.)
Joshua (1245 B.C.E.)
Pinchus and the Elders
Eli (929 B.C.E.)
Samuel (889 B.C.E.)
David (876 B.C.E.)
Achiah (800 B.C.E.)
Elijah (726 B.C.E.)
Elishah (717 B.C.E.)
Yehoyada (695 B.C.E.)
Zechariah (680 B.C.E.)
Hoshea (575 B.C.E.)
Amos (560 B.C.E.)
Isaiah (548 B.C.E.)
Michah (560 B.C.E.)
Yoel (510 B.C.E.)
Nachum (510 B.C.E.)
Chavakuk (510 B.C.E.)
Tzafaniah (460 B.C.E.)
Jeremiah (462 B.C.E.)
Baruch (347 B.C.E.)
Ezra (348 B.C.E.)
Shimon Hatzadik (310 B.C.E.)
Antignus of Socho (305 B.C.E.)
Yosi ben Yoezer and
Yosef ben Yochanon (280 B.C.E.)
Yehoshua ben Prachya and
Nitai of Arbel (243 B.C.E.)
Yehuda ben Tabai and
Shimon ben Shetach (198 B.C.E.)
Shmaya & Avtalyon (140 B.C.E.)
Hillel & Shammai (40 B.C.E.)
Rabban Shimon (10 B.C.E.)
Rabban Gamliel Hazaken (20 C.E.)
Rav Shimon ben Gamliel (50)
Rabban Gamliel (90)
Rabban Shimon (140)
Rabbi Yehuda Hanasi (180)
Rav, Shmuel, and Rabbi Yochanon (230)
Rav Huna (270)
Rabbah (310)
Rava (340)
Rav Ashi (420)
Rafram (443)
Rav Sam a B'rei d'Rava (476)
Rav Yosi (514)
Rav Simonia Rav Ravoi Me-Rov (589)
Mar Chanan Me-Ashkaya (60

Rav Mari
Rav Chana Gaon
Mar Rav Rava
Rav Busai (689)
Mar Rav Huna Mari
Mar Rav Chiyah Me-Mishan
Mar Ravyah
Mar Rav Natronai
Mar Rav Yehuda (739)
Mar Rav Yosef (74:18 )
Mar Rav Shmuel
Mar Rav Natroi Kahana
Mar Rav Avrohom Kahana (761)
Mar Rav Dodai
Rav Chananya (771)
Rav Maika (773)
Mar Rav Rava
Mar Rav Shinoi (782)
Mar Rav Chaninah Gaon Kahana (785)
Mar Rav Huna Mar Halevi (78: 18 )
Mar Rav Menasheh (796)
Mar Rav Yeshaya Halevi (804)
Mar Rav Kahanah Gaon (797)
Mar Rav Yosef
Mar Rav Ibomai Gaon (814)
Mar Rav Yosef
Mar Rav Avrohom
Mar Rav Yosef (834)
Mar Rav Yitzchak (839)
Mar Rav Yosef (841)
Mar Rav Poltoi (85: 18 )
Mar Rav Achai Kahana
Mar Rav Menachem (860)
Mar Rav Matisyahu (869)
Rav Mar Abba
Mar Rav Tzemach Gaon (891)
Mar Rav Hai Gaon (897)
Mar Rav Kimoi Gaon (905)
Mar Rav Yehuda (917)
Mar Rav Mevasser Kahana Gaon (926)
Rav Kohen Tzedek (935)
Mar Rav Tzemach Gaon (937)
Rav Chaninah Gaon (943)
Mar Rav Aharon Hacohen (959)
Mar Rav Nechemiah (96

Rav Sherirah Gaon (1006)
Meshulam Hagadol
Rav Gershom Meor Hagolah (1040)
Rav Yaakov ben Yakar (1064)
Rav Shlomo Yitzchaki - '"Rashi'" (1105)
R' Shmuel ben Meir (Rashbam) (1174)
R' Yaakov ben Meir (Rabbenu Tam) (1171)
Eliezer Me-Metz (1175)
Rokeach (123

R' Yitzchak of Vienna (Ohr Zaruah)
Rav Meir of Rothenberg (1293)
R' Yitzchak of Duren (Shaarei Durah)
R' Alexander Zusiein Hakohen (Agudah) (134

Meir Bar Baruch Halevi (1390)
R' Sholom of Neustadt
R' Yaakov Moelin (Maharil) (1427)
R' Yisroel Isserlein (Trumas Hadeshen) (1460)
R' Tavoli
Rabbi Yaakov Margolies (1501)
Rabbi Yaakov Pollak (1530)
Rabbi Sholom Shachna (155

Rabbi Moshe Isserles '"Rama'" (1572)
Rabbi Yehoshua Falk Katz (1614)
Rabbi Naftoli Hirsch ben Pesachya (1650)
Rabbi Moshe Rivkas - '"Be'er Hagolah'" (1671)
Rabbi Avraham Gombiner (1682)
Rabbi Moshe @#%$ (168

Rabbi Eliyahu Chasid (1710)
Rabbi Yissachar Ber (1740)
Rabbi Shlomo Zalman (1765)
Rabbi Eliyahu @#%$ - '"Vilna Gaon'" (1797)
Rabbi Chaim Voloziner (1821)
Rabbi Zundel of Salant (1866)
Rabbi Yisroel Salanter (1883)
Rabbi Simcha Zissel of Chelm (188

Rabbi Yerucham Lebovitz (1936)

Pirkei Avos (Ethics of the Fathers) Mishna 1

Moshe Ki'bel Torah M'Sinai:

Quote:
MOSHE RECEIVED (ki'bel) TORAH FROM SINAI AND TRANSMITTED IT (u'm'sa-ra) TO JOSHUA, AND JOSHUA TO THE ELDERS, AND THE ELDERS TO THE PROPHETS, AND THE PROPHETS TRANSMITTED IT TO THE MEN OF THE GREAT ASSEMBLY.

Being Jewish has a very interesting article which proves the age and validity of Torah by starting from when we modern folk know it was around going backwards in time they prove how it had to exist each step along the way:

Quote:
We will work backwards in time. Let's first prove that the Bible is two thousand years old, and work backwards from there.

1,800 Years Ago
The Chrstians
I think there is little question that 1,800 years ago the Torah already existed. The Chrstians have been using their confused mistranslations of the Tanach at least since the second century C. E., and even trying to prove their mistaken beliefs from the Torah. So the Torah is certainly already in existence for about 1,800 years.

2,000 Years Ago
Josephus and Philo
But it certainly existed before then as well. Josephus lived almost two thousand years ago, around the first century C.E., and wrote his works probably around 75 C.E. Josephus mentions the Torah numerous times, and clearly refers to it as something that had been around a long time. In his work called Contra Apion, he writes:

For we have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from and contradicting one another, as the Greeks have, but only twenty-four books, which contain the records of all things past; which are justly believed to be divine; and of them five belong to Moses, which contain his laws and the traditions of the origin of mankind till his death. (Book 1, Chapter 1, Number
There you have a clear reference to the Books of the Bible, and explicit mention of the Five Books of Moses. This is just one reference of many. Josephus mentions the Torah throughout many of his works. (See, for example, Antiquities of the Jews 4:8:3 and 2:16:5.)

Josephus is very clear that by his time there already existed a book of Laws written by Moses, and that it tells of the stories that Josephus himself tells in his Antiquities.

But was Josephus speaking of something new, or something that was already very old? Josephus was speaking of something that was already considered very old in his time. How do I know? Because he says so. In Contra Apion, Josephus writes that our Sacred Books are very old, and he asserts that no one has ever added to them or changed them in all the years since they were created.

...and how firmly we have given credit to these books of our own nation is evident by what we do; for during so many ages as have already passed, no one has been so bold as either to add any thing to them, to take any thing from them, or to make any change in them; but it is become natural to all Jews immediately, and from their very birth, to esteem these books to contain Divine doctrines, and to persist in them, and, if occasion be willing to die for them. It is no new thing for our captives, many of them in number, and frequently in time, to be seen to endure racks and deaths of all kinds upon the theaters, that they may not be obliged to say one word against our laws and the records that contain them; whereas there are none at all among the Greeks who would undergo the least harm on that account [i.e., for their own books].... (1:1:
So it is quite clear that the Jews had these books, and believed in them, long before Josephus, who lived almost two thousand years ago. The Jews of his time, almost 2,000 years ago, already had all the Written Torah we have today, and believed them to be the originals, just as we believe today.

Let's go back a little further. Philo (around 20 B.C.E. to around 50 C.E.) also talks about the Books of the Torah, in his work The Life of Moses (II:288-91). He also says that the books of the Torah are very old.

The writings of Josephus and Philo both prove that the Written Torah was already composed by the first century of the Common Era.

2,200 Years Ago
The Septuagint, Sadducees, and Ben Sira
Let's go back a little more. The Septuagint (a Greek translation of the Torah first written by Rabbis and later changed dozens of times by numerous people), is claimed by the Gentiles to date back to 275 B.C.E. (Our Tradition dates it a bit later, at 245 B.C.E., according to Rabbi Fendel, in Legacy of Sinai, page 136.) So the Written Torah already existed at that time.

Also around that time, the emergence of the Sadducee and Boethusian sects took place. The Sadducees took as their platform the statement that they believed only in the Written Torah, and rejected the Oral Torah. Evidently, at that time both the Written Law and the Oral Law already existed.

So now we know that the Torah already existed by around 275 or so B.C.E. That's 2,275 years ago, as I write this.

Let's go back a little more. Ben Sira (circa 400 B.C.E.) also mentions the Books of Torah, in the same number and names that we have them today. So the Tanach existed then as well, around 2,400 years ago.

2,500 Years Ago
The Samaritans, and the Ten Tribes
We can go yet further back. The Samaritans learned the Torah from the Ten Tribes sometime around 550 B.C.E. So, by then the Chumash and Joshua were already written. Some of the Kohanim of the Ten Tribes taught it to them. Any time after that, the Samaritans would not have accepted the Torah from the people of Judah, because of the Samaritans' hatred for them. So, since both the Jews and the Samaritans have the Chumash, we know that the Chumash had to have been written some time before 550 B.C.E., before the two groups stopped having contact with each other.

This also proves that the Torah could not have been written during the time of the two kingdoms. Since the Ten Tribes taught the Chumash to the Samaritans, that means the Ten Tribes had to have had the Chumash before they split off from the other two Tribes. During all the time that they were split, neither kingdom would never have taken Torah from the other.

Yet the later Books, written by Prophets among the two Tribes in Judah show numerous examples of how the Ten Tribes kept the Laws of the Torah (with occasional lapses), and that they had the Torah (see, for example, I Kings 21:13; II Kings 4:23, 7:3; Hosea 4:6; 8:1, 8:12; Amos 8:5, et. al.).

So, during the time of King Solomon, before the breakup of the nation into two kingdoms, the Chumash must have already existed. But they must have already existed earlier, or the Ten Tribes would never have accepted them. They took them because before they broke off these Books had already been fully accepted by all Israel.

2,800 Years Ago
King David
Could the Torah have been written during the time of King Solomon, or during the reign of his father, King David? Definitely not.

Consider what the Torah says about the nations of Moab.

The Torah (Deut. 23:4-7) says that a man from the nation of Moab may never marry a Jewish woman, even if he converts to Judaism. Even the descendant of a convert from Moab may never marry a Jewish woman. This was because of the way they treated us when we passed near their land on the way to the Land of Israel. They did not come forward to offer us bread and water, as was their custom. The women of Moab, however, after conversion to Judaism, are not forbidden to marry a Jewish man, because it was not the custom of the Moabite women to meet travelers with bread and water, and also because they had no connection with the attempt to curse Israel.

Now, you may remember that King David was a descendent from Ruth, a Moabite woman who converted to Judaism. You can imagine the trouble that must have caused. As a matter of fact, the Rabbis tells us that King David's enemies certainly tried to get a lot of mileage out of that, and tried to claim, falsely, that a converted Moabite woman was also forbidden to marry a Jew.

Now, wouldn't it simply have been easier for King David, if he wrote the Torah, to leave out that Law? It does not seem at all logical that King David would have written this in the Torah, or that any of the people of his time would have done that.

Therefore, that dates the Torah to at least before the time of King David, who was born in 836 B.C.E. That's already 2836 years ago.

(By the way, King David and King Solomon are both mentioned in the history of the Phoenicians and the Tyrenes, according to Josephus. Both the Phoenicians and the Tyrenes did business with the Israelites during those eras.)

2,900 Years Ago
The Judges
Perhaps the Torah was written just before King David was born, during the era of the Judges? That, too, cannot be. The Torah says that it is forbidden to wage war against the nations of Moab and Ammon (Deuteronomy 2:19). Yet the Judges all the way from after Joshua to King David (inclusive) fought with those nations! Ammon invaded Israel during the time of Yiftach the Judge (around 970 B.C.E.), and Moab oppressed them during the time of Ehud the Judge (around 1160 B.C.E.). They had to fight with them out of self-defense, so they would never have included such a Law in the Torah had they composed it!

The Israelites spent a great deal of time and energy, and lost many good people defending themselves against those nations. Would the Prophets or Judges or anyone of that time have written a Law stating that it was forbidden to attack Moab or Amon if they were inventing the Torah? So the Torah could not have been written during the time of the Judges either.

Therefore the Torah predates the Judges, and come from the time of Moses and Joshua! That means that we have had the Torah for 3,313 years. And therefore, the Torah tells us that Moses told the Children of Israel:

Only take heed and watch yourselves very carefully, so that you do not forget the things that your eyes saw. Do not let this memory leave your hearts, all the days of your lives. Teach your children, and your children's children about the day you stood before Hashem your G-d at Horeb (Deut. 4:9-10).
(Horeb is another name for Mount Sinai.)

Moses wrote the Torah according to the instructions given him by Hashem. Hashem dictated the Torah to Moses, letter by letter. Moses then taught it to the Children of Israel. And we have studied the Torah ever since, for 3,313 or so years.

Of course, the Torah itself is much older than that. Our Tradition tells us that Hashem created the Torah, both the Written and the Oral, 2,000 years before He created the universe. Hashem used it as a blueprint when He created the universe. And Hashem then kept it until it was time for us to receive it.

(The approach of this article, as well as some of the proofs, I took primarily from the works of Rabbi Avigdor Miller, especially Sing You Righteous, paragraphs 102-121.)

My Recent Posts · (09/27/08

This is an easy claim to MAKE but where is the proof? "You changed it!" Yeah, right. But HOW? There isn't, and never has been, one central "copying house" where books were copied - it has always been done locally wherever a new copy of a particular book was needed, working from an existing, older copy. How is it possible in these circumstances to alter EVERY copy of a book in existence so that NOT ONE copy of the "earlier version" remained? And do you think nobody would have noticed? When the Torah and N'viyim are read aloud in batei k'nesset, if the reader makes even the smallest error he is immediately corrected by members of the congregation calling out the correct word to him! If anyone HAD tried to alter the text it would have been noticed as soon as that passage were next read aloud and the attempt would have failed.

The books that were excluded from the canon of the T'nach as unreliable and are now known as the "Apocrypha", by the way, were discarded hundreds of years BEFORE Yoshke by the Anshei K'nesset Hag'dolah ("Members of the Great Synod") in or soon after the time of Ez'ra.

And Sophie, it is a mistake to respond to such nonsense with a great long m'gillah such as your post #1 - that only gives the impression that there IS something to hide. A short reply is much more effective in these circumstances.

My Recent Posts · (09/27/08

The messiah would be born of a virgin? This is Isaiah 7:14 rearing its ugly head again, and the word used here is NOT virgin, but young woman who IS pregnant (not will be pregnant). The Dead Sea Scrolls which pre-date Chrstianity should prove that the Chrstian idea of a virgin birth is the lie and distortion, not us Jews.

Or does your Chrstian debater think we changed Isaiah BEFORE Jsus was supposedly born?

Origen, an early church father (circa 325 CE) tried to piece together a decent translation by putting 6 different versions side by side (called the Hexapla). Here is what HE says about how bad the Septuagint had become

Quote:

"we are forthwith to reject as spurious the copies in use in our Churches, and enjoin the brotherhood to put away the sacred books current among them, and to coax the Jews, and persuade them to give us copies which shall be untampered with, and free from forgery!" Origen, A Letter from Origen to Africanus, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 4.]

So it isn't us Jews who have made forgeries. Even the Chrstians recognize it is they themselves!

You might want to read Justin Martyr's "Dialogue with Trypho a Jew" (165 CE). Martyr was a Xian and he wrote an apologetic trying to convert Jews to Xianity. He played the part of both Jew and himself -- but he makes it clear that Jews back 200 CE were telling Xians that Isaiah 7 did not speak about virgins:

And Trypho answered, "The scripture has not, 'Behold, the virgin shall conceive, and bear a son,' but, 'Behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son,' and so on, as you quoted.

But the whole prophecy refers to Hezekiah, and it is proved that it was fulfilled in him, according to the terms of this prophecy.

Moreover, in the fables of those who are called Greeks, it is written that Perseus was begotten of Danae, who was a virgin; he who was called among them Ze-us having descended on her in the form of a golden shower. And you ought to feel ashamed when you make assertions similar to theirs. . .do not venture to tell monstrous phenomena, lest you be convicted of talking foolishly like the Greeks."

I wouldn't waste my time debating with one who is so ill educated. You are just wasting your time -- his (her?) anti-semitism shines through.

My Recent Posts · (09/28/08

odessajew wrote:
One objection I've met by a missionary is that the Jewish version of the Tanakh as read today by Jews was manipulated and changed by a group of Rabbis after the death of Jesus, in order to make the prophecies "seem unfulfilled."

This is an old missionary claim that not only demonstrates their desperation to defend the problems with the Greek Text, it also demonstrates their ignorance. After all, the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) found at Qumran were written long before the advent of yeshu, and there are only minor differences between the Masoretic Text that is used in today's Hebrew Bibles and the texts in the DSS.

UriYosef

My Recent Posts · (10/04/08

A rather dull argument on christian part since Jesus himself said:
Mattew 5:18
"because I tell you with certainty that until heaven and earth disappear,
not one letter or one stroke of a letter will disappear from the Law until everything has been accomplished."

So if they are right and the Torah has been modified, Jesus is wrong.
If they are wrong, their argument fails.
Its a lose/lose situation, really.

My Recent Posts · (10/05/08

Dipinto wrote:
A rather dull argument on christian part since Jesus himself said:
Mattew 5:18
"because I tell you with certainty that until heaven and earth disappear,
not one letter or one stroke of a letter will disappear from the Law until everything has been accomplished."

So if they are right and the Torah has been modified, Jesus is wrong.
If they are wrong, their argument fails.
Its a lose/lose situation, really.

At one time on another board, I had Matt 5:18 in my signature line. However, a xian told me I had the quote wrong. He told me that the Greek word that occurs here is "Entole" which means an order, command, charge, precept, injunction that which is prescribed to one by reason of his office. He said that it doesn't refer to our bible, it refers to Jesus's words. Since I have no knowledge of the xian bible, I had no way to debate his assertion.

My Recent Posts · (10/06/08

Quote

Dipinto wrote:
A rather dull argument on christian part since Jesus himself said:
Mattew 5:18
"because I tell you with certainty that until heaven and earth disappear,
not one letter or one stroke of a letter will disappear from the Law until everything has been accomplished."

So if they are right and the Torah has been modified, Jesus is wrong.
If they are wrong, their argument fails.
Its a lose/lose situation, really.

At one time on another board, I had Matt 5:18 in my signature line. However, a xian told me I had the quote wrong. He told me that the Greek word that occurs here is "Entole" which means an order, command, charge, precept, injunction that which is prescribed to one by reason of his office. He said that it doesn't refer to our bible, it refers to Jesus's words. Since I have no knowledge of the xian bible, I had no way to debate his assertion.
______________________________________________________

Not sure that you remembered correctly or what your friend was stating but the word "entolon"/"εντολων" ( from entole) appears in the following verse (Matt 5:19) meaning "commandment", ie clause of the "Law"/"νομου" (noumou [from noumos]) that J stipulated in 5:18 will not change.

Bradley

My Recent Posts · (10/06/08

Ezekah wrote:
He told me that the Greek word that occurs here is "Entole"....

The "xian" in question either was deliberately lying or else was totally clueless. In Stephens's Textus Receptus (1550), Mattai 5:18 reads

αμην γαρ λεγω υμιν εως αν παρελθη ο ουρανος και η γη ιωτα εν η μια κεραια ου μη παρελθη απο του νομου εως αν παντα γενηται
amen gar lego hymin eos an parelthe o oyranos kai e ge iota e mia karaia oy me parelthe apo toy nomoy eos an panta genetai

Approximately translated, this means

Because in truth I tell you [that] until heaven and earth should have passed away, nont one iota [the Greek letter "i"] nor one point [Greek κεραια "keraia", = Hebrew k'ré?] will in any way pass away from the Law [Greek νομος "nomos"] until everything has come about.

The Greek word νομος "nomos" is exactly the same word that is used on numerous occasions in the GT to translate the Hebrew word תּוֹרָה Torah (as, for example, in the preceding verse - Mattai 5:17).

My Recent Posts · (10/06/08

I saw that one of the claims was that we changed or removed the virgin birth from our bibles.

The Hebrew word in question in Isaiah 7:14 is הָעַלְמָה/ha-'almah.
In the Greek Septuagint (Christian OT) this word is translated as παρθενος/parthenos.
In the Latin Vulgate (Christian OT) this word is translated as virgo.
In the KJV (Christian OT) this word is translated as virgin.

The different forms of the word עַלְמָה/'almah are used 7 times in the Hebrew Bible. הָעַלְמָה/ha-'almah in particular is used three times including the example in Isaiah 7:14. The two other examples are:

B'reshit/Genesis 24:43 (Judaica Press Tanach)
43. Behold, I am standing by the water fountain. When a maiden (הָעַלְמָה/ha-'almah) comes out to draw [water], I will say to her, 'Please, give me a little water to drink from your pitcher.'

Sh'mot/Exodus 2:8 (Judaica Press Tanach)
8. Pharaoh's daughter said to her, "Go!" So the girl (הָעַלְמָה/ha-'almah) went and called the child's mother.

Although it can be assumed that the young girls (Rebecca and Miriam) in these two verses were virgins, the word in and of itself has no sexual implications. A young maiden may very well be a virgin, or may very well not be. Moving on, how do the Greek Septuagint and Latin Vulgate translate these two other instances of this same exact word?

The Greek Septuagint translates the word in Genesis 24:43 as παρθενος/parthenos.
The Greek Septuagint translates the same exact word in Exodus 2:8 as νεανις/neanis.

The Latin Vulgate translates this word at Genesis 24:43 as virgo.
The Latin Vulgate translates the same exact word in Exodus 2:8 as puella.

The word ha-'almah is the same in all three of these instance in the Hebrew Bible, yet for some reason both early Christian translations - the Greek Septuagint and Latin Vulgate - choose to translate the instances in Genesis and Isaiah differently than in Exodus. This difference is also carried over into the KJV where Genesis 24:43 and Isaiah 7:14 read "virgin" and Exodus 2:8 reads "maid".

Why? What is the purpose? What caused all of these Christian translators to translate the word correctly in Exodus 2:8 in reference to Miriam, then turn around and mistranslate it as if the original word denotes sexual connotation (Rebecca and the woman in Isaiah)?

What can the manner in which the GS (Greek Septuagint) uses parthenos tell us? Are there any other Hebrew words which the GS translates into parthenos? Why, in fact, there are a number of other words. הַנַּעֲרָ/ha-na'ara in Genesis 24:14, 16, and 55 for instance. And נַעֲרָ/na'ara in Deuteronomy 22:23. And הַבְּתוּלָה/ha-b'tulah in Judges 19:24. And בְתוּלָה/b'tulah in 2 Samuel 13:2. And בְּתוּלַת/b'tulat in 2 Kings 19:21. And let us not forget the two instances of הַנַּעֲרָ/ha-na'ara in Genesis 34:3, which the GS translates once as parthenos and once as parthenon.

The GS translates all of these words as the same word, parthenos. But do they all have the same meaning? Are they all just different words for the same thing?

The answer is no. Na'ara - like 'almah - has no inherent sexual connotation. In the case of Rebecca it is used for a young maiden that is a virgin. However, in the case of Dinah (Genesis 34:3) it is used for a young maiden that is most definitely not a virgin. Yet the GS uses the same word - parthenos - for both a young virgin as well as a non-virgin.

All of this calls into question why the word is used in situations where the sexual experience of the person it is being used for is not known. Not only that, but because of its use in an instance where the young girl in question is most certainly not a virgin, it calls into question whether the word parthenos in the Greek Septuagint is even meant to denote a virgin. In a number of cases parthenos is used for the Hebrew word b'tulah which does mean virgin. But it's use for words ('almah and na'ara) that don't inherently mean virgin make it difficult to conclude whether the GS authors intended for the word parthenos to be understood exclusively to mean a virgin (in which case they would have been mistranslating quite a number of verses) or if they intended to use the word parthenos to denote a young maiden.

To summarize, the history of the GS and the Latin Vulgate shows how the original Hebrew words which mean one thing were translated using words which mean something entirely different. It is not we who changed or took out the "virgin birth" it is the Christian translators who added it.

Now, of course, we could go into the numerous other things which discount any notion of a virgin birth, such as the context of Isaiah 7:14 itself, but staying strictly with language, an objective observer should be able to see how the original word - with each translation - took on more and more a meaning which it never had.

On a side note, עַלְמָה/'almah is feminine, the masculine form is עֶלֶם/'elem. It is used twice in the Hebrew Bible, once for David in 1 Samuel 17:56 (הָעָלֶם/ha-'alem), and the other for the youth in 1 Samuel 20:22 (לָעֶלֶם/la-'elem). In none of the cases of 'almah or 'elem is it used to mean "virgin". It is obvious that the word has to do with something other than sexual status. Try fitting virgin into these verses and perhaps you will see how ridiculous it sounds trying to force Isaiah 7:14 to say thus.

My Recent Posts · (10/07/08

Netanel wrote:
I saw that one of the claims was that we changed or removed the virgin birth from our bibles.
The Hebrew word in question in Isaiah 7:14 is הָעַלְמָה ha-'almah....

Netanel, may I take this opportunity to point out, yet again, that - like the christians - you are obsessing over the WRONG WORD - הָרָה harah in Y'shayahu 7:14 is not a verb, but the adjective "pregnant". It isn't an inflected form of the verb "to conceive" at all.

This has been discussed previously on these boards and (eventually) even Uri Yosef conceded the point. The words הִנֵּה הָעַלְמָה הָרָה hinneh ha-almah harah mean

"THERE [pointing to her] IS A PREGNANT GIRL"

and the prophet wasn't predicting that anyone was going to become pregnant at some unspecified time in the future - his almah (WHATEVER that word means) was already pregnant.

My Recent Posts · (10/07/08

Mordochai,

How am I obsessing over harah when I didn't mention it at all? The point of my post was that ha-almah has no sexual connotation. As you point out, the girl in Isaiah is already pregnant. Ha-almah is used irrespective of the sexual "status" of the person it is being applied to. I made my post because it helps to show how the Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate corrupt the meanings of certain words, rather than just saying it happened. I am not obsessing over any word, but explaining the error of Christian translations (Greek, Latin, and English) which read into Isaiah 7:14 something that isn't actually there.

My Recent Posts · (10/07/08

Netanel wrote:
How am I obsessing over harah when I didn't mention it at all?

I didn't say you were obsessing about harah - I meant that you were obsessing over almah which is the wrong word. The key word in the verse is harah, not almah. If harah is translated correctly, whether almah conveys information about the subject's sexual experience or not becomes irrelevant (from the point of view of christianity).

Amusingly, Strong appends to his notes on word number #5959 עַלְמָה an irrelevant and ludicrously dishonest note copied from page 672 of Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament by R. Laird Harris and others:

There is no instance where it can be proved that עַלְמָה designates a young woman who is not a virgin....

As it just so happens, that is true, but so what? Consider the specious logic of that double negative: just because it cannot be proved from Scriptural context that עַלְמָה doesn't designate a non-virgin, does that prove conclusively that it does designate a girl who is virgo intacta? It also can't be proved that the word al'mah designates a young woman who isn't a blue-eyed, blonde, hunch-backed, 93-year-old woman with a beard - so according to that logic Y'shayahu 7:14 could mean

Behold, the blue-eyed, blonde, hunch-backed, 93-year-old woman with a beard shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son.....

My Recent Posts · (10/07/08

Ah, I see what you're saying. Of course I agree with you. At the same time, Christians come up with all kinds of ridiculous apologetics. Since they see "types and shadows" it doesn't matter to many of them what the tense is on the woman's pregnancy. I was not and am not disputing what you are saying, however, I see no problem with pointing out the fallacious nature of Christian translations in particular of the word ha-almah. It is an undeniable paper trail on the part of Christian translators from the Septuagint, to the Latin Vulgate, down to the KJV.

My Recent Posts · (10/07/08

Netanel wrote:
It is an undeniable paper trail.... down to the KJV.

Don't you mean the KJPV?

My Recent Posts · (10/07/08

Of course.

My Recent Posts · (03/21/09

It is an interesting debate...but let me you know what is my humble idea about Messiah but without willing to compare with The Torah.

I do think The Messiah is in the Words. Words which must be fullfilled on G-d´s Will, and bringing it to a pragmatical and scientist viewpoint, can be considered The Messiah as any word which bring peace, knowledge, love, understanding, kindness, Unity...so that, it is not more about Who is the Messiah, but so about What is it exactly...but obviously anybody who brings a G-d´s Word fullfiled on Virtues or Sefirtohs (the what) then, can be considered from my viewpoint as Word of Messiah as anybody (Who) who express those G-d´ly messages...

For example; The Command; "Love your fellow". This is a Messiahnic word who was expressed by a higher spiritual people, a Prophet. But will bring Redemption only is we perform that Commandment...

Well, it is my opinion...

My Recent Posts · (03/21/09

Yosef wrote:

It is an interesting debate...but let me you know what is my humble idea about Messiah but without willing to compare with The Torah.

I do think The Messiah is in the Words. Words which must be fullfilled on G-d´s Will, and bringing it to a pragmatical and scientist viewpoint, can be considered The Messiah as any word which bring peace, knowledge, love, understanding, kindness, Unity...so that, it is not more about Who is the Messiah, but so about What is it exactly...but obviously anybody who brings a G-d´s Word fullfiled on Virtues or Sefirtohs (the what) then, can be considered from my viewpoint as Word of Messiah as anybody (Who) who express those G-d´ly messages...

For example; The Command; "Love your fellow". This is a Messiahnic word who was expressed by a higher spiritual people, a Prophet. But will bring Redemption only is we perform that Commandment...

Well, it is my opinion...

Your native language isn't English, I take it? I'm certainly having difficulty with your post.

My Recent Posts · (03/22/09

Splittter.

You are right. I am spanish, and from Spain. The english I can speak is not very good enough. Sorry about it and I will try to explain it better my last post, right now.

I did mean The Messiah is in the words. There are evil words and G-dly Words. Depend of us to perform those G-dly words expressed by higher spiritual people as Phrofets or any body who brings a G-dly message, even you can bring a G-dly Word to us; Comprehesion, Understanding, Wisdom, Justice, Love, Kindness, Hekping to one another...all of them up to me are G-dly words or expressions.

On the other hand, up to me is not more important to know who is The Messiah but so, What is The Messiah, at this point I do think The Messiah is into the words as Torah is The Word of G-d, as I did mention before there are G-dly words as; Love your Fellow, Improve yourself... as it is mentioned in Bereishis. There are G-dly Words and then, Messiahnic Words when The sefiroths are expressed into The Language, The Verb; for example The virtue or Sefirath of Gevurah (Justice or Restriction) is expresesed like a word used commonly in any one as "not to injure to one another", the opposite to this will be an evil word, and then a destruction will come to society. Then Messiah is already come by The Torah, by any New G-dly Word who any come brings to us...Then The Messiah being "implicity" The G-dly Word is Messiahnic itself, but The Redemption will come if we perform those G-dly Words into our Lifes.

The Question will be what are the characteristics of A G-dly Word, Messiahnic..?

My Recent Posts · (03/22/09

Yosef wrote:
what are the characteristics of A G-dly Word, Messiahnic..?

The answers are found here: Why Jews Know Jsus was a false messiah

My Recent Posts · (03/22/09

Yosef:

I am trying to understand your position, but the more I contemplate this, the more I'm a little concerned by a few things: To "Love your neighbor (literally kinsman)" as one's self is not a "messianic" word. It was a direct command given at Sinai by G-d to Israel. The Entire nation (1 million plus people) heard the Voice of G-d. This isn't "messianic".. this is direct command from the Almighty. The Words are not the Messiah.

Your quote:

"I do think The Messiah is in the Words. Words which must be fullfilled on G-d´s Will, and bringing it to a pragmatical and scientist viewpoint, can be considered The Messiah as any word which bring peace, knowledge, love, understanding, kindness, Unity...so that, it is not more about Who is the Messiah, but so about What is it exactly...but obviously anybody who brings a G-d´s Word fullfiled on Virtues or Sefirtohs (the what) then, can be considered from my viewpoint as Word of Messiah as anybody (Who) who express those G-d´ly messages... "

My response:

HUH???? So if I recite the Torah's messages, I too am a candidate for being the Messiah??? Wow.. who knew that I could go from a mere convert to a Messiah?? Do you think of the Messiah as an actual person or just an emanation based on the allegorical concepts that contained in the Kabbalah (as referenced by your mentioning the Sefriot)? And how is it that the Messiah is "in the words"? I ask this because while my Hebrew is NOT that great, I didn't actually encounter the word Moshiah in the Torah. Granted, the Torah (especially in Devarim) does certainly give specific commandments when Israel appoints a king, but I'm not so sure that it is reference to the Messiah. I have not yet encountered the commentary notes that say it specifically does.

How have you developed your approach that the Messiah is in the Torah and that obedience to the Torah automatically brings the Messiah? I'm sincerely curious.

Thanks!

Yuku free message boards

Did Jews intentionally revise prophecies in the Torah to "hide" the truth of Jesus as the messiah

Did Jews intentionally revise prophecies in the Torah to "hide" the truth of Jesus as the messiah

Quick Reply