Yuku free message boards

It is very easy to make pronouncements, but not so easy to back them up with facts.

First of all IF you were able to prove that the Torah (lets forget the 'nach for a minute) was "unreliable" your own religion falls apart. Chrstianity bases its entire authority on the T'nach, let alone the Torah. So you are on a razor's edge -- by refuting the T'nach you destroy your own religion.

But facts ARE funny things. The Greek text that forms the basis for Chrstianity is corrupt and this is easily proven (I proved it in the first post in this very thread). You said that non-Jews who come here are often given a long list of things they are saying in their responses that are taboo and unacceptable . Nothing is taboo. Nothing is unacceptable. As long as the RULES are followed. The rules are clearly posted and should be easy to follow.

Anyone can make a point as long as they do not break these rules. Rules of the Counter Missionary Forum

The ones usually violated by missionaries?

1. Treat others with respect. Posts that are deemed otherwise will be edited if possible or removed without explanation.

2. This is a counter-missionary forum. Discussions here must relate to countering deceptive missionary tactics of various religions.

3. Non-Jews are free to ask questions about Judaism but non-Jews attempting to teach Judaism will have their posts edited or removed. Such posts are misleading.

4. Posts insulting Judaism, Jewish sages, Jewish teachings, etc. will be edited and / or deleted. Such insults may result in a suspension or even banning from participation on the Messiah Truth board.

Respect (or lack thereof) seerms to be a big problem -- even your initial post is full of disrespect. You are a guest here. This is a TEACHING forum. We treat posters with respect -- even if we do not respect their beliefs. Many non-Jews come here, as you did, full of assertions and then precede to try to teach Judaism to Rabbis and teachers of Judaism. This is not only disrespectful, but it is senseless. How can you teach something you do not know?

So your premise is faulty from the start, but feel free to try as long as you abide by the forum rules.

Feel free to put forward your arguments: no doubt we've heard them all before -- but first do you know the difference between Torah, Nevi'im and Ketuvi'im? Your first post seemed to lump them all together.

JCDefender wrote:

---

The Greek LXX , has proven to be more reliable and consistent with the most ancient manuscripts of the Tenach , than the later Masoretic Hebrew text , from which rabbnical Jewish people like yourself , base their scriptures .

That must be why the Chrstians said it was corrupt and stopped using it, right? This would INCLUDE the King James translators. You continue to show ignorance and wave it proudly as waving a flag.

The Greek LXX (Septuagint) has proven to be more reliable and consistent than the Hebrew? What fairy tale is this!

The "modern" Septuagint / LXX is a Xian work of unknown origin, NOT a Jewish translation. The original LXX was a translation only of the Torah and the translators purposefully made a few errors. Prophets and Writings were NOT translated (this would include Isaiah, Ezekiel, and so forth). Eventually Jews in exile translated parts of Prophets and Writings into Greek and other languages, but there was no "standard" in place and the translations were not identical.

Eventually apostate Jews translated the T'nach into Greek for the Chrstians, but again the Chrstians themselves realized these were inaccurate and corrupt. As a result the Xians stopped using the Septuagint by the 5th century, preferring to go back to the Hebrew original and re-translate it into other languages. Here are some statements by church leaders on the fact that the Septuagint as they knew it (and we know it today) is not reliable:

Origen, an early church father (died 232 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.]

---

The point of quoting Origen is to show that whoever the original translators were of the rest of the bible the various Greek versions became very corrupt over time. The Xians themselves realized this -- as Origen states. It is the OPPOSITE of your contention that the LXX is more accurate.

Read St. Jerome (early 5th century) who decided to re-translate from the MT rather than rely on the Septuagint saying:

Quote:

---

"I was stimulated to undertake the task by the zeal of Origen, who blended (the Septuagint) with the old edition Theodotions translation"

---

He blended together the various translations that Origen had compiled in an attempt to get a half way decent version. These are the men who began what the Chrstians today rely upon as their own bible, and they certainly believed we Jews had the original, uncorrupted text.

If you were correct regarding the LXX then Chrstian translators would use it, wouldn't you think? Yet most modern Xian translations don't use the Greek except in cases of proof texts. Even the KJV translators realized it was corrupt and translated from Hebrew. This is from the preface to the original KJV:

Quote:

---

(The Septuagint) "It is certain, that that Translation was not so sound and so perfect, but it needed in many places correction; and who had been so sufficient for this work as the Apostles or Apostolic men? . . .

. . . the Translation of the Seventy was allowed to pass for current. Notwithstanding, though it was commended generally, yet it did not fully content the learned, no not of the Jews.

For not long after Chr*st, Aquila fell in hand with a new Translation, and after him Theodotion, and after him Symmachus; yea, there was a fifth and a sixth edition, the Authors whereof were not known

---

If Origen, St. Jerome and the KJV translators say the LXX is corrupt, who are you to disagree?



The following was written by UriYosef giving ample evidence from the modern LXX that shows it is not the product of Jewish scholars. Let me (UriYosef) cite some examples:

- The Masoretic Text speaks of seventy (70) people going to Egypt in Joseph's party in three places - Genesis 46:27, Exodus 1:5, and Deuteronomy 10:22. Today's LXX has seventy-five (75) at Genesis 46:27 and Exodus 1:5, and seventy (70) at Deuteronomy 10:22. Would 72 learned bi-lingual Rabbis make such an error?

- The Babylonian Talmud (Tractate Megilah, Folio 9a,b) records fifteen (15)phrases which the Jewish scholars translated in a unique fashion, and which deviate from the (later) Masoretic Text - Genesis 1:1, 1:26, 2:2, 5:2, 11:7, 18:12, 49:6; Exodus 4:20, 12:40, 24:5, 24:11; Leviticus 11:6; Numbers 16:15; and Deuteronomy 4:19, 17:3. Today's LXX has only two (2) of these) - Genesis 2:2 and Exodus 12:40. Why would a Jewish translator leave out most of those 15 phrases?

-The prevalent dialect of Greek spoken in the mid-3rd century BCE was Koin Greek, which was the dialect of Greek into which the Original Septuagint (the Torah) was translated. Today's LXX is written in a more modern dialect of the Greek language than Koin Greek. This clearly indicates a much later date than mid-3rd century BCE.

These examples, coupled with the common mistranslations used by missionaries and the variations not only in the canonical arrangements of the LXX vs. the Hebrew Bible, but also the variations in chapter&verse numbering (which came later in both cases), are concrete evidence that today's LXX is not the product of Jewish scholars regardless who produced the translations of Prophets and Writings before the Common Era.

You make these claims (again questions PLEASE), and yet you do not support them. In the post here and the on about Job in the "General Judaism" forum I've shown you have no clue about the historical facts surrounding any of your assertions. You really do need to study a bit more if you want to come here and present a convincing argument!

JCDefender wrote:

My tone is no more or less arrogant and insensitive than yours . The only difference is that you consider all genuine criticism , and challenges to your faith , an insult . . . .

You are truly poorly educated. I released your last post with its many rule violations, including arrogance, so that you can be an example to others of exactly how Jews fall victim to missionaries through ignorance. As has been explained to you numerous times: this is a TEACHING forum, so ask questions! The more you continue with insults and arrogance the more likely your fortune telling that your posts will be edited or deleted will come true.

If you are so certain that Judaism is wrong then PROVE it. Surely that should be easy enough to do by asking questions and following the rules of decorum. Oh, and I suggest you invest in a good spell checker.