Samaritan Torah differences

Q: What are manuscript variations between the Massoretic text and other versions vs. the Samaritan Pentateuch? 

A: Here are some of them. The verse references in bold are where we are uncertain of the correct reading. The ones not in bold are almost certainly where the Samaritan Pentateuch is incorrect. There are many other variants not listed here where the Samaritan Pentateuch is almost certainly incorrect too. 

Gen 4:8 "Abel" vs. "Abel, Let us go out to the field" (Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint, Neophyti I targum, Syriac, compare Vulgate)
The genealogical tables in Genesis 5 and 11:10-26 are a little different in the Samaritan Pentateuch (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5)
Gen 10:4 "Dodanim" vs. "Rodanim" (some Hebrew, Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint)
Gen 22:19 "Ram behind [him]" (most Massoretic texts) vs. "Ram" (some Massoretic texts, Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint, Syriac)
Gen 30:36 absent vs. "that an angel appeared to Jacob in a dream revealing his portion in Laban’s herds" (Samaritan Pentateuch)
Gen 31:49 "Mizpah" vs. "pillar witnesses" (Septuagint) vs. "the pillar of Mizpah" (Samaritan Pentateuch)
Gen 36:3 "Basemath" (Massoretic texts, Septuagint) vs. "Mahalath" (Samaritan Pentateuch) (The Expositor’s Bible Commentary p.195)
Gen 36:16 "Korah/Core" (Massoretic texts and Septuagint) vs. (absent) (Samaritan Pentateuch, 1 Chronicles 1:36)
Gen 36:39 "Hadar" (most Massoretic texts) vs. "Barad" (Septuagint) vs. "Hadad" (some Massoretic texts, Samaritan Pentateuch, Syriac)
Gen 37:36 "Medanites" vs. "Midianites" (Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch, Vulgate, Syriac)
Gen 41:48 "food of the seven years which were in the land" vs. "food of the seven years, in which was the plenty in the land " (Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch)
Gen 46:13 "Puah" vs. "Phua" (Septuagint) vs. "Puvah" (Samaritan Pentateuch, Syriac, 1 Chronicles 7:1)
Gen 46:13 "Iob" vs. "Jashub" (some Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch)
Gen 46:16 "Ziphion" vs. "Zephon" (Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch, Numbers 26:15)
Gen 47:21 "he removed them to the cities" vs. "he made slaves of them" (Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch)
Gen 49:7 "their anger is cursed" vs. "their anger is beautiful" (Samaritan Pentateuch) (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5)
Gen 50:23 "upon the knees of Joseph vs. "in the days of Joseph" (4 letters) (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5)
Ex 1:22 "born" vs. "born to Hebrews" (Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint, and Targums)
Ex 4:22 "my first-born son" vs. "My own people" (Samaritan Pentateuch) (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5)
Ex 12:16 "all work" vs. "any kind of servile work" (Samaritan Pentateuch) (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5)
Ex 12:40 "children of Israel lived in Egypt" (Massoretic) vs. "children of Israel lived in Egypt and Canaan" in (Septuagint) vs. "children of Israel and their fathers lived in Egypt and Canaan" (Samaritan Pentateuch). Josephus writing about 93-94 A.D. in Antiquities of the Jews2.15.2 also says they were in Egypt 215 years which is consistent with the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint. Josephus said it was 430 years after Abraham came into Canaan. See Pharaohs and Kings : A Biblical Quest p.330-331 for more info. The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5 says, "in the land of Canaan".
Ex 15:8 "breath from your nostrils" vs. "breath from you" (Samaritan Pentateuch) (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5)
Ex 20:17 is immediately followed by Dt 11:29-30 and 27:2b-3a,407, telling the Israelites to build the temple on Mt. Gerizim in the Samaritan Pentateuch. (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5 p.937)
Ex 20:24 "in the placed where I have caused my name" vs. "in every place where I will cause my name" (Samaritan Pentateuch) (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5)
Ex 22:8 "Elohim" to "El" (Samaritan Pentateuch) (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5)
Lev 11:13-19, vulture" (21 birds) vs. absent (20 birds) Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch
Lev 26:31 "your sanctuary" vs. "your sanctuaries" (Samaritan Pentateuch) (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5)
Num 2:14 the name "Reuel" vs. "Deuel" in the Samaritan Pentateuch, Vulgate, and many Massoretic manuscripts. The Hebrew letters for "r" and "d" are very similar, and this is similar to "Rodanim vs. Dodanim in Genesis 10:4. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.2 p.715 says that Deuel is probably the superior reading.
Num 3:12 "I have taken the Levites … instead of every firstborn" (Massoretic text and 4Q23 vs. "I have taken the Levites … they will be the ones redeemed instead of every firstborn" (Samaritan Pentateuch
Num 3:39 "and Aaron" with special dots over the word (many Massoretic texts) vs. "and Aaron" (Septuagint) vs. absent in numerous Hebrew manuscripts, Syriac, and the Samaritan Pentateuch. Scribes would do this to express doubt about the verse. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.2 p.728 says, "The presence of these dots over a questionable word the scribes were loath to drop shows the level of care and concern for the minutia of the text by the Jewish scholars through the ages."
Num 4:3 "from 30 years old" (Massoretic text, 4Q23, Samaritan Pentateuch) vs. "from 25 years old) (Septuagint)
Num 9:3 "in the evening" (Massoretic text, Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint) vs. "in the day" (4Q23)
Num 10:11 is immediately preceded by Dt 1:6-8 in the Samaritan Pentateuch. (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5 p.937)
Num 14:41 is immediately preceded by Dt 1:20-23 in the Samaritan Pentateuch. (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5 p.937)
Num 20:13 is immediately followed by Dt 3:24-28 in the Samaritan Pentateuch. (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5 p.937)
Num 20:13b is immediately followed by Dt 2:2-6 in the Samaritan Pentateuch. (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5 p.937)
Num 21:11 is immediately followed by Dt 2:9 in the Samaritan Pentateuch. (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5 p.937)
Num 21:12 is immediately followed by Dt 2:17-19 in the Samaritan Pentateuch. (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5 p.937)
Num 21:20 is immediately followed by Dt 2:24-29,31 in the Samaritan Pentateuch. (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5 p.937)
Num 22:20; 23:4,5,16 "God" vs. "an angel of God" Samaritan Pentateuch) (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5)
Num 24:17 (uncertain) vs. "the skulls" in the Samaritan Pentateuch
Num 26:17 "Arod" vs. "Arodi" in the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Syriac
Num 26:23 "through Puvah/Puwah/Puwwah, the Punite" (many Hebrew manuscripts) vs. "through "Pu’ah, the Puite" in the Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch, Vulgate, and Syriac.
Num 26:39 "Shephupham" vs. "Shupham" in the Samaritan Pentateuch, Vulgate, Syriac, Septuagint, and some Massoretic manuscripts
Num 26:40 absent vs. "through Ard" in the Samaritan Pentateuch and Vulgate
Num 27:23 the Samaritan Pentateuch adds "and said to him and then adds Deuteronomy 3:21-22.) The Expositor’s Bible Commentaryvol.2 p.94
Num 32:29,31,33 "Gad … Reuben" 3 times ( Massoretic, 4Q23) vs. "Reuben … Gad" 3 times (Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint)
Num 33:8 "from before Hahiroth" vs. "Pi Hahiroth" in the Samaritan Pentateuch, Vulgate, and many Massoretic manuscripts
Dt 1:8 "The Lord" vs. "I" (Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint)
Dt 2:8 and 10:6-7 are based on Num 20:17-18 and Num 33:31-38a in the Samaritan Pentateuch. (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5 p.937)
Dt 5:5 "word" vs. "words" (Dead Sea Scrolls, Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint, Syriac, Vulgate, Targum)
Dt 5:21 is immediately followed by Dt 27:2-7 in the Samaritan Pentateuch. (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5 p.937)
Dt 9:24 "I have known" vs. "he has known" (Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint)
Dt 9:28 "Lest the land" vs. "Lest the people of the land" (Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch)
Dt 11:14 "I" vs. "he" (Samaritan Pentateuch, some Septuagint, Vulgate, a mezuzah quotation from the Dead Sea Scrolls)
Dt 12:5 "place where the LORD your God will choose" (Massoretic) vs. "place where the LORD has chosen" (Samaritan Pentateuch)
Dt 20:8 "lest the heart of his brothers faint" (Massoretic, Targum) vs. "lest he make his brother’s heart faint" (Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint, Syriac, Vulgate)
Dt 25:1 "his private parts" vs. "his flesh" (Samaritan Pentateuch)
Dt 27:4 "Mount Ebal" vs. "Mount Gerizim" (Samaritan Pentateuch and Old Latin) [The Samaritans likely changed this to improve their claim that Gerizim, not Jerusalem, was the mountain where they should worship.]
Dt 28:30 changes "grabbed his private parts" (sgl) to "grabbed his flesh" (yshbn)
Dt 28:11 "cattle … ground" (Massoretic, some Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch) vs. "g[round, … c[attle]" (4QDeut( c ), some Septuagint)
Dt 30:9 "cattle … ground" (Massoretic) vs. "ground … cattle" (4Deut(b), Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint) The Dead Sea Scrolls Biblep.187
Dt 31:7 "You will go" vs. "You will bring" (Some Massoretic text, Samaritan Pentateuch, Vulgate)
Dt 32:6 "he repented" vs. "he forgave" (Samaritan Pentateuch) (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5)
Dt 32:10 "found him" vs. "sustained him" (Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint)
Dt 32:15 "Jeshurun" vs. "Jacob ate his fill; Jeshurun" (Dead Sea scrolls, Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint)
Dt 32:43 "cleans his land his people" vs. "cleans the land for his people") Dead Sea Scrolls, Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint, Vulgate)
Dt 32:44 "Hoshea" (Massoretic) vs. "Joshua" (Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint, Syriac, Vulgate) Hosea was Joshua’s name prior to Moses renaming him.
Dt 33:2 "He came from Ribebot-kodesh" vs. "with him were myriads of holy ones" (Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint, Syriac, Vulgate)
Dt 33:12 "will dwell securely upon him" (Massoretic) vs. "will dwell securely" (Samaritan Pentateuch) vs. "upon God" (Septuagint, Dead Sea scroll 4Q35)
Dt 34:10 "there arose not again a prophet like Moses in Israel vs. "there will not arise again" (Samaritan Pentateuch) (The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol.5)

--------------------------

The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring into the house of the Yahuah thy God. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk, that one doing this as sacrifice forgets and enrages God of Jacob (Exodus 23:19 Samaritan Torah)

"Bring the best of the firstfruits of your soil to the house of the LORD your God. "Do not cook a young goat in its mother's milk. (Exodus 23:19 Masoretic Torah)

Notice how the prohibition in the Samaritan has an edition to it, “that one doing this as sacrifice forgets and enrages God of Jacob”. This is left out from the Masoretic?

You shall no add or subtract!

And Shem lived after he begat Arphaxad five hundred years, and begat sons and daughters. And they were all days of Shem six hundred years and he is dying. (Genesis 11:11 Samaritan Torah) ---------------------- And Shem lived after he fathered Arpachshad 500 years and had other sons and daughters. (Genesis 11:11 Masoretic Torah)
You shall not add or subtract
	And Arphaxad lived after he begat Salah three hundred and three years (303), and begat sons and daughters. And they were all days of Arphaxad eight and thirty years and four hundred years (438) and he is dying. (Genesis 11:13 Samaritan Torah) --------------------- And after he became the father of Shelah, Arphaxad lived 403 years and had other sons and daughters. (Genesis 11:13 Masoretic Torah)

You shall not add or subtract

And lived Salah thirty years and one hundred years (130), and begat Eber:And Salah lived after he begat Eber three hundred and three years, and begat sons and daughters. And they were all days of Salah three and thirty years and four hundred years (433), and he is dying. (Genesis 11:14-15 Samaritan Torah)

---------------

When Shelah had lived 30 years, he fathered Eber. And after he became the father of Eber, Shelah lived 403 years and had other sons and daughters. (Genesis 11:14-15 Masoretic Torah)

You shall not add or subtract

When Eber was 34 years old, he became the father of Peleg. And after he became the father of Peleg, Eber lived 430 years and had other sons and daughters. (Genesis 11:16-17 Masoretic Torah)

----------

And Eber lived four and thirty and hundred years (130), and begat Peleg: And Eber lived after he begat Peleg two hundred and seventy years, and begat sons and daughters. And they were all days of Eber four years and four hundred years (404), and he is dying. (Genesis 11:16-17 Samaritan Torah)

You shall not add or subtract

And Nahor lived nine and seventy years (79), and begat Terah: And Nahor lived after he begat Terah an sixty and nine years (69), and begat sons and daughters. And they were all days of Nahor eight and forty years and hundred years (148), and he is dying (Genesis 11:24-25 Samaritan Torah)

---------------

When Nahor had lived 29 years, he became the father of Terah. And after he became the father of Terah, Nahor lived 119 years and had other sons and daughters. (Genesis 11:24-25 Masoretic Torah)

----------------------------------

And also of the son of this maid I will make a” GREAT NATION” , because he is your descendent. (Genesis 21:13 Samaritan Torah)

                                                   

                                                     Compare with

And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed. (Genesis 21:13 Masoretic Torah)

--------------------

Notice how the Masoretic Torah left out the word “GREAT” and just used nation, whereas the Samaritan Torah explicitly says “GREAT NATION” together. A similar alteration of the text regarding Ishmael is found in Genesis 16:12

He will be a FRUITFUL MAN; his hand will be with everyone and everyone's hand will be with him, and he will live among all his brothers."(Genesis 16:12 Samaritan text) 

                                                 

                                                          Compare with 

He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone's hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers." (Genesis 16:12 Masoretic text)

Makes you wonder why did the Masoretic Torah hide those text which are found in the Samaritan Torah? What were they trying to achieve my making Ishmael look less important than Isaac his brother? It’s obvious the Jews knew something special about Ismael  which they tried to hide but failed.





--------------------------------

Samaritan or Masoretic?

And Maryaam and Aahrron spoke about Mooshe because of THE BEAUTIFUL woman whom he had married. For he had married A BEAUTIFUL woman, (Numbers 12:1 Samaritan Torah)

                                                                   compare with

And Miriam and Aaron spoke AGAINST Moses because of THE CUSHITE woman whom he had married; for he had married A CUSHITE woman.  (Numbers 12:1 Masoretic Torah)

WHICH VERSION IS CORRECT?




--------------------

Christians claim they have answers to questions posed by Muslims. If that's the case, Christians should be able to answer this simple question with ease.

Which version is correct?

when He [God] separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the nations according to the number of the angels of God. (Deuteronomy 32:8 Septuagint Torah)

-----------------------

when He [God] divided all mankind, he set up boundaries for the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel. (Deuteronomy 32:8 Masoretic Torah)

-----------------------------------

a) angels of God

b) sons of Israel

if A is correct, then B is wrong, or vice versa. this would mean a tampering has taken place between the two, the question is which one?


--------------------------

The traditional view that Moses was the author of the Torah came under increasing and detailed scrutiny in the 17th century. In 1651 Thomas Hobbes, in chapter 33 of Leviathan, cited several passages, such as Deuteronomy 34:6 ("no man knoweth of his sepulchre to this day", implying an author living long after Moses' death); Numbers 21:14 (referring to a previous book of Moses' deeds) and Genesis 12:6 ("and the Canaanite was then in the land", implying an author living in a time when the Canaanite was no longer in the land); and concluded that none of these could be by Moses. Others, including Isaac de la Peyrère, Baruch Spinoza, Richard Simon, and John Hampden came to the same conclusion, but their works were condemned, several of them were imprisoned and forced to recant, and an attempt was made on Spinoza's life

Samaritans predate the Israelites

The Samaritans themselves claim to be descended from the original Israelite inhabitants of northern Israel. The biblical account (II Kings 17:24ff) states that they are descended from foreigners imported into the land by Sennacherib after he had destroyed the northern Israelite state and exiled its people, but who learned the Torah from Israelite priests whom Sennacherib brought back at their request. Either way, then, the Samaritan scriptures must derive from earlier Israelite originals.

 

However, Ezra considered them foreigners and did not allow them to help in the building of the temple, or worship with the people of Judah. [1]

 

Which claim is correct?

Pauls evil deceptions exposed!!!

I“Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law. To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.” – 

(1 Corinthians 9:19-23)

Paul is confessing in the above passage that, he acted as a Jew in order to convert them to his faith. He even acted as a pagan so that he can lure them to his religion. The above verse shows that Paul would go in great lengths to spread his religion by deception.

------------------------------------------------------

Further evidence which shows Paul openly confessing to the Christians Corinthians that he used deception against them. The verse states:

Now granted, I have not burdened you; yet sly as I am, I took you in by deceit! – 

( 2 Corinthians 12:16)

How old was Benjamin when he came to Egypt ?

A little boy, child?

And we said unto my lord, We have a father, an old man, and a child of his old age, a little one (Benjamin); and his brother is dead, and he alone is left of his mother, and his father loveth him. (Genesis 44:20)

And we said to my lord, 'The boy (Benjamin) cannot leave his father; if he leaves him, his father will die.' (Genesis 44:22)

                                                -------------------------------------

A Grown man with Children of his own?

These are the names of the sons of Israel (Jacob and his descendants) who went to Egypt: Reuben the firstborn of Jacob. (Genesis 46:8)

And the sons of Benjamin: Bela, Becher, Ashbel, Gera, Naaman, Ehi, Rosh, Muppim, Huppim, and Ard. (Genesis 46:21)

Another Christian misquotes the bible!

Christians often brag they know the bible inside out, you get this mostly from the Nigerian Christians. They have formed some sort of a sickness where they believe the Holy Ghost is guiding them and they know it all.  Whenever Christians start bragging I Normally ask them, "TELL ME HOW WELL VERSED ARE YOU WITH THE HEBREW BIBLE?". Practically all of them reply by saying " I DONT KNOW HEBREW SO IM NOT THAT WELL VERSED". And can I respect that, it's not like everything single african Christian knows Hebrew let alone koine Greek. Which brings us to the focal point of this paper.

Victor anyiwo is no exception when it comes to understanding the Hebrew bible. I've had by share of correcting him when it comes to the bible many times. Yet this man never learns talk about being shameless. Quite recently he made a post on Facebook regarding a  certain verse found in the Torah. Let's read his post before we once again correct him.

--------------------------------------

APOLOGIST NUGGETS: GOD'S WALK

-

I once stumbled across a rather interesting (yet often neglected verse) somewhere in the book of Leviticus :

-

| Leviticus | 25:12 | KJV | 

" I will WALK amongst you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people." 

-

Did you notice that the key word is "WALK " and not "WORK"? This clearly suggest a walk of God upon the earth in person of His Son ~ Jesus of Nazareth.

--------------------------------------

Now judging from victors understanding of the Old Testament, it shows he hasn't a clue of what he wrote? And it's evident from his own writings where we wrote :

"I once stumbled across a rather interesting (yet often neglected verse) somewhere in the book of Leviticus"?

He stumbled across a verse????????? Seriously !!!!! Let's analyse his so called God Walking on earth theory and close this case. Rather then just reading from the KJV we shall read what the Hebrew bible commentators say about this particular verse and how when reading further verses show victors lack or understanding.

--------------

12I will walk among you and be your God, and you will be My people.
I will walk among you: [God promises a blessing of special spiritual quality, involving intimate knowledge of Him (Zeidah Laderech):] “I will stroll with you in the Garden of Eden, as if I were one of you, and you will not be terrified of Me.” Now, one might think that you will not fear Me [under such “familiar” circumstances]. Scripture, therefore, says here, “and be your God.” - [Torath Kohanim 26: 15]

Notice from the above commentary by rashis  “I will stroll with you in the Garden of Eden,. Note not on earth rather in the Garden of Eden.

----------

Matthew Poole's Commentary

I will walk among you, as I have hitherto done, both by my pillar of cloud and fire, and by my tabernacle, which have walked or gone along with you in all your journeys, and stayed among you in all your stations, to protect, conduct, instruct, and comfort you. 

Ye shall be my people; I will own you for that peculiar people which I have singled out of the mass of mankind, to bless you here, and to save you hereafter.

----------

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

12. I will walk among you] Cp. Genesis 3:8.

----------

David Guzik

I will set My tabernacle among you, and My soul shall not abhor you. I will walk among you and be your God, and you shall be My people: The best promises are saved for last: First, that Israel would enjoy a special relationship with God. If not for this, all the material blessings described previously would be empty.

i. When Israel walked after the LORD, these blessings were real; one example of this is when the Queen of Sheba came to Solomon and saw a nation so blessed, she knew it had to be of God (1 Kings 10:1-13).

It's clear from the above commentaries that the verse is speaking about Yahweh the God of isreal not about Jesus. But there's more in order to prove that this verse is really not speaking about Jesus we shall carry on reading the chapter and see if it really speaks of Jesus or not?

Punishment for Disobedience

14“ ‘But if you will not listen to me and carry out all these commands, 15and if you reject my decrees and abhor my laws and fail to carry out all my commands and so violate my covenant, 16then I will do this to you: I will bring on you sudden terror, wasting diseases and fever that will destroy your sight and sap your strength. You will plant seed in vain, because your enemies will eat it. 17I will set my face against you so that you will be defeated by your enemies; those who hate you will rule over you, and you will flee even when no one is pursuing you.

18“ ‘If after all this you will not listen to me, I will punish you for your sins seven times over. 19I will break down your stubborn pride and make the sky above you like iron and the ground beneath you like bronze. 20Your strength will be spent in vain, because your soil will not yield its crops, nor will the trees of your land yield their fruit.

21“ ‘If you remain hostile toward me and refuse to listen to me, I will multiply your afflictions seven times over, as your sins deserve. 22I will send wild animals against you, and they will rob you of your children, destroy your cattle and make you so few in number that your roads will be deserted.

23“ ‘If in spite of these things you do not accept my correction but continue to be hostile toward me, 24I myself will be hostile toward you and will afflict you for your sins seven times over. 25And I will bring the sword on you to avenge the breaking of the covenant. When you withdraw into your cities, I will send a plague among you, and you will be given into enemy hands. 26When I cut off your supply of bread, ten women will be able to bake your bread in one oven, and they will dole out the bread by weight. You will eat, but you will not be satisfied.

--------------

Here's the sucker punch! If verse 12 was really speaking of Jesus then the proceeding verses which speaks of the same WALKING GOD tells us whosoever doesn't follow his commandments then he will PUNISH THEM! 

Verse 16 tells us He will bring on the Terror, Fever and Disease? Wait a tick didn't Jesus supposed to have healed people from Diseases?

Verse 18 he will Punish people seven times over verse 22 he will send Wild Animals to rob Children's Destroy cattle ?? Didn't Jesus say children's are sinless and will inherit the kingdom of heaven? 

Verse 25-26 he will bring plague? Now maybe Christians can show us where Jesus  bought a plague on his people and cut off their bread supply? Didn't he feed 5000 people ??

And it goes on and on, the above is sufficient to show how Victor how misunderstood the text deceiving himself and others thinking it applied to his so called saviôur when it's nowhere close to it.

 It's very embarrassing how Christians expose themselves by bragging!

Are you afraid of the word Sharia

 So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading. (Nehemiah 8:8)

------------------

Are you aware the Arabic bible says The SHARIA BOOK OF GOD

8 وَقَرَأُوا كِتابَ شَرِيعَةِ اللهِ قِسْماً قِسْماً وَأوضَحُوا مَعْناها، فَفَهِمَ الشَّعبُ ما قُرِئَ عَلَيهِمْ.

                                          (Nehemiah 8:8 Arabic)

شَرِيعَةِ = Sharia : one wonders if Yahweh's book is considered as Sharia which means Law.. Why are you afraid of the word Sharia ??? Are you saying the law of the Torah is not harsh and the law of Islam is, if that's the case why don't any Christian country implement biblical laws? Is it because it's Inhumane and can destroy the country rather then keep it attached

Where is the missing Torah now?

Interestingly we find passages in the bible which tells us the Missing Torah was found, during the reign of Josiah when he was king of Israel 640-609?

-----------------------

Later on, Hilkiah the high priest informed Shaphan the scribe, "I've discovered the Book of the Law in the LORD's Temple." Hilkiah gave the book to Shaphan, and he began to read it.

(2 kings 22:8)

He went up to the temple of the LORD with the people of Judah, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the priests and the prophets--all the people from the least to the greatest. He read in their hearing all the words of the Book of the Covenant, which had been found in the temple of the LORD.

(2 kings 23:2)

Furthermore, Josiah got rid of the mediums and spiritists, the household gods, the idols and all the other detestable things seen in Judah and Jerusalem. This he did to fulfill the requirements of the law written in the book that Hilkiah the priest had discovered in the temple of the LORD.

(2 Kings 23:24)

While they were bringing out the money that had been taken into the temple of the LORD, Hilkiah the priest found the Book of the Law of the LORD that had been given through Moses.

(2 Chronicles 34:14)

Hilkiah said to Shaphan the secretary, "I have found the Book of the Law in the temple of the LORD." He gave it to Shaphan.

(2 Chronicles 34:15)

-------------------------------------------------

Not convinced with the above passages, To make matters worse we read in Ezra and Nehemiah According to the Hebrew Bible he returned from the Babylonian exile and reintroduced the Torah in Jerusalem.... 

Nehemiah 8 specifically verses 14 & 17 tells us explicitly how the people were not celebrating the feast laud down by the Torah 

14 And they found written in the Law, how that HaShem had commanded by Moses, that the children of Israel should dwell in booths in the feast of the seventh month; 

17 And all the congregation of them that were come back out of the captivity made booths, and dwelt in the booths; for since the days of Joshua the son of Nun unto that day had not the children of Israel done so. And there was very great gladness. 

They had never celebrated Sukkot (The Feast of Booths) in that country! ("Since the days of Joshua.") Apologists will tell you that the people had simply forgotten the Torah and Ezra was bringing it back to them. However, Richard Friedman points out that in Leviticus 23, the laws for Sukkot seem to be added on to the list of holidays. The list goes from verses 4-37 and ends, "These are the holidays of Hashem." Then, two verses later, it suddenly starts listing the laws of Sukkot. This makes sense in hindsight. Combined with evidence (Neh 8:17, above) that Sukkot wasn't celebrated until Ezra showed up with the Torah, it seems reasonable that Ezra added those verses to an earlier text when he redacted the Torah.

(Friedman brings many more arguments in support of Ezra being the redactor. For example, he points out that this is the first time in all of Tanakh that a finished copy of the Five Books appears)

Talmud tells us It has been taught: R. Jose said: Had Moses not preceded him, Ezra would have been worthy of receiving the Torah for Israel. Of Moses it is written, And Moses went up unto God

(Sanhedrin 21b)

Destroy completely all the places on the high mountains, on the hills and under every spreading tree, where the nations you are dispossessing worship their gods.

Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones and burn their Asherah poles in the fire; cut down the idols of their gods and wipe out their names from those places.

(Deuteronomy 12:2-3)

---------------------------------

Let's read what bible commentators have to say about all this:

Pulpit Commentary 

_________________

Verses 8-14. - Discovery of the book of the Law. When Shaphan had transacted with Hilkiah the business entrusted to him by the king, Hilkiah took the opportunity of sending word by him to the king with respect to a discovery that he had recently made, during the investigations connected with the repairs. He had found a book, which he called without any doubt or hesitation, "the book of the Law" - סֵפֶר הַתּורָה - and this book he put into the hands of Shaphan, who "read it," i.e. some of it, and found it of such importance that he took it back with him to the palace, and read a portion to the king. Hereupon the king "rent his clothes," and required that special inquiry should be made of the Lord concerning the words of the book, and particularly concerning the threatenings contained in it. The persons entrusted with this task thought it best to lay the matter before Huldah, a prophetess, who lived in Jerusalem at the time, and pro-seeded to confer with her at her residence. Verse 8. - And Hilkiah the high priest said unto Shaphan the scribe, I have found the book of the Law in the house of the Lord. There has been great difference of opinion as to what it was which Hilkiah had found. Ewald believes it to have been the Book of Deuteronomy, which had, he thinks, been composed some thirty or forty years before in Egypt by a Jewish exile, and had found its way, by a sort of chance, into Palestine, where "some priest" had placed a copy of it in the temple ('History of Israel,' vol. 4. pp. 233-235). Thenius suggests "a collection of the laws and ordinances of Moses, which was afterwards worked up into the Pentateuch;" Bertheau, "the three middle books of the Pentateuch, Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers;" Gramberg, "Exodus by itself." But there seem to be no sufficient grounds for questioning the ancient opinion - that of Josephus, and of the Jews generally - that it was a copy of the entire Pentateuch. (So De Wette, 'Einleitung in das Alt. Test.,' § 162 a; Keil, 'Commentary on Kings,' pp. 477, 478; Bahr, 'Commentary,' vol. 6. p. 257; and others). The words, סֵפֶר הַתּורָה, "the book of the Law," are really sufficient to decide the point; since, as Keil says, they "cannot mean anything else, either grammatically or historically, than the Mosaic book of the Law (the Pentateuch), which is so designated, as is generally admitted, in the Chronicles and the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah." The same conclusion follows from the expression, "the book of the covenant" (סֵפֶר הַּבְןןרִית), in 2 Kings 23:2, and also from 2 Kings 23:24, 25, and 2 Chronicles 34:14. Whether or no the copy was the actual original deposited in the ark of the covenant by Moses (Deuteronomy 31:26), as Keil believes, is doubtful. As Egyptian manuscripts which are from three to four thousand years old still exist in good condition, there can be no reason why a manuscript of Moses' time should not have been found and have been legible in Josiah's. But, if not the actual handwriting of Moses, it was probably its lineal descendant - the copy made for the temple service, and kept ordinarily "in the side of the ark" - which may well have been lost in the time of Manasseh or Amen, and which was now happily "found." And Hilkiah gave the book to Shaphan, and he read it. We need not suppose that Shaphan read the whole. But he read enough to show him how important the work was, and how necessary it was to make it known to the king.

Maclaren's Exposition Commentary 

________________________________

We have, first, the discovery of the law. The important and complicated critical questions raised by the narrative cannot be discussed here, nor do they affect the broad lines of teaching in the incident. Nothing is more truthful-like than the statement that, in course of the repairs of the Temple, the book should be found,-probably in the holiest place, to which the high priest would have exclusive access. How it came to have been lost is a more puzzling question; but if we recall that seventy-five years had passed since Hezekiah, and that these were almost entirely years of apostasy and of tumult, we shall not wonder that it was so. 

Cambridge Bible for schools and colleges Commentary

________________________________________________

8. I have found the book of the law in the house of the Lord] Much discussion has arisen about the discovery which this verse records. Before entering on the question of what it was which Hilkiah found, it may be well to notice briefly the circumstances of the time. Josiah had succeeded his father at the age of eight, and in the previous fifty-seven years the kingdom had twice over been deluged with all the abominations of idolatry. The greater proportion therefore of the inhabitants of Jerusalem would have had little chance of knowing the law and its requirements. The temple had been neglected, perhaps closed, during a large part of these years.

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

-------------------------------------------

(8) I have found.--Literally, the book of the Torah have I found. The definite form of the expression proves that what the high priest found was something already known; it was not a book, but the book of the Law. How little the critics are agreed as to the precise character and contents of the book in question is well shown by Thenius: "Neither the entire then existing Scripture (Sebastian Schmidt), nor the Pentateuch (Josephus, Clericus, Von Lengerke, Keil, Bhr,) nor the ordered collection of Mosaic laws contained in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers (Bertheau), nor the book of Exodus (Gramberg), nor the book of Deuteronomy (Reuss, Ewald, Hitzig) is to be understood by this expression. All these must have been brought into their present shape at a later time.

What a shame the evidence is super strong!!!

What a fabulous contradiction...

Yes I know bible and contradictions, it's getting boring now right? Wrong not when you read what I have come up with, a fabulous error lol.. Imagine two books speaking of the same event yet they completely lose the plot...  Let's read each passages and spot the difference... ( this is gonna hurt)

While Josiah was king, Pharaoh Necho king of Egypt went up to the Euphrates River to help the king of Assyria. King Josiah marched out to meet him in battle, but Necho faced him and killed him at Megiddo. Josiah’s servants brought his body in a chariot from Megiddo to Jerusalem and buried him in his own tomb. And the people of the land took Jehoahaz son of Josiah and anointed him and made him king in place of his father. (2 kings 23:29-30)

So from the above passage it's crystal clear King Josiah was slain at Magiddo. Servants brought his dead body to Jerusalem. Yet when we read the exact situation from the book of chronicles we find a compete contradictory passage..

---------------

Josiah, however, would not turn away from him, but disguised himself to engage him in battle. He would not listen to what Necho had said at God’s command but went to fight him on the plain of Megiddo.Archers shot King Josiah, and he told his officers, “Take me away; I am badly wounded.” So they took him out of his chariot, put him in his other chariot and brought him to Jerusalem, where he died. He was buried in the tombs of his ancestors, and all Judah and Jerusalem mourned for him. (2 chronicles 35:22-24)

Wait a sec in 2 Chronicles King Josiah was wounded at Magiddo and not killed. His Servants brought him alive to Jerusalem, where he died.

--------------------------------

In short : 

2 Kings 23:29-30 tells us King Josiah was slain at Magiddo. Servants brought his dead body to Jerusalem. Whereas 2 Chronicles 35:22-24 He was wounded at Magiddo. Servants brought him alive to Jerusalem, where he died.

Such super blunders and problems are only found in the bible which is supposed to be inspired ! SHAME SHAME!!

No need to debate !!!!!!!!

Christian : was Jesus a Muslim?

Muslims : Yes he was a Muslim !

Christian : No he wasn't !

Muslim : was Jesus a Christian?

Christians : No he wasn't !

(By Now a sudden shift of aggressive tone comes out from the Christian man)

Christian : you Muslims don't get it Jesus cannot be a Christian, since Christian means CHRIST FOLLOWER! He can't follow himself now can he? Jesus was a Jew not Muslims !!!!!

Muslim : thank you for clarifying  that Jesus was not a Christian! And for the record Jew is a race not religion, did Jesus ever call himself a  Jewish Rabbi or Pharisee, or did he sanction Judaism as the religion of truth? Infact did he ever utter the word Judaism?

Christian : No he Never considered himself a Jewish rabbi nor did he consider himself as a Pharisee, he condemned their actions.

Muslim : was Jesus a believer who obeyed God?

Christian : Yes he was sinless he obeyed Yahweh and never disobeyed !

Muslim : if Jesus was not a Christian nor a Jewish rabbi who follows the Tanack only yet was a man who obeyed God alone and never disobeyed what do you call such a person?...... A MUSLIM ONE WHO SUBMITS HIMSELF TO GOD AND OBEYS ALL HIS ORDERS !

 

Jesus Pbuh speaking from the cradle a miracle also recognised by the Bible.

It is often criticised by Christians regarding the story of Jesus Pbuh speaking from the cradle as found in the Quran. They disagree with the entire story except for the virgin birth, probably because it will only backfire on them as the virgin birth is also found in the New Testament. Christians mock Muslims by saying there is no mention in the bible of Jesus speaking when he was a baby nor does the bible mention of any baby speaking. 

This claim made by Christians is not true, since animals, trees and mythical creatures speak in the bible. However, that's not our point, we shall show from the very Bible Christians and Jews read alongside the Oral tradition (Talmud) where babies have spoken or would be depending on situations.

Interesting the Old Testament and New Testament Both agree that babies speak:

From the lips of babes and infants you have ordained praise, because of your adversaries, that you might silence the enemy and the avenger. 

(Psalm 8:2)

At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. (Matthew 11:25)

"Do you hear what these children are saying?" they asked. "Yes," Jesus answered, "have you never read: 'From the mouths of children and infants You have ordained praise'?" (Matthew 21:16)

--------------

The above Biblical verses are crystal clear that God can make babies speak and praise him. Now let's analyse those saying. Notice how babies have been ordained by God to speak and praise him, which means it's not impossible or an absurd claim to make saying babies can speak. According to Matthew 21:16 Jesus himself is making the claim that babies were taught to praise referring to Psalm 8:2.

 here's what the Talmud says:

§ The Sages taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei HaGelili taught: At the time that the Jewish people ascended from the sea they resolved to sing a song of gratitude to God. And how did they recite this song? If a babywas lying on his mother’s lap or an infant was nursing from his mother’s breasts, once they saw the Divine Presence, the baby straightened his neck and the infant dropped the breast from his mouth, and they recited: “This is my God and I will glorify Him”(Exodus 15:2). As it is stated: “Out of the mouths of babies and sucklings You have founded strength” (Psalms 8:3). (Talmud 

Sotah 30b:16)

Notice how the Talmud makes mention of “Babies reciting the Glory of God”. The Talmud makes it clear they were breastfed infants and now the babies “strengthened his neck” in order to lift is showing how weak and fragile this little baby was.

Second point we read in the statement found in psalm, were not only does God make babies speak and praise him he also silences the adversaries through the words spoken by them. This is a very remarkable statement as we can read from the Quran where Jesus Pbuh spoke from the cradle and silenced the evil questioners.

27. At length she brought the (babe) to her people, carrying him (in her arms). They said: "O Mary! truly an amazing thing hast thou brought! 28. "O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste!" 29. But she pointed to the babe. They said: "How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?" 30. He said: "I am indeed a servant of Allah. He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet; 31. "And He hath made me blessed wheresoever I be, and hath enjoined on me Prayer and Charity as long as I live; 32. "(He) hath made me kind to my mother, and not overbearing or miserable; 33. "So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)"! 34. Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute. 35. It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him! when He determines a matter, He only says to it, "Be", and it is. (Surah 19:27-35)


The Quran is clear in details how the Jews accused Mary Pbuh and how Allah Swt made Jesus Pbuh speak from the cradle defending his blessed mother Mary Pbuh from their false allegations and silencing them. A miraculous event which Christians dispute, the truth spoken by Allah Swt   34. Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute. 

---------------

just for the records this miracle of Jesus Pbuh speaking from the cradle was also believed by early Christians found in apocrypha gospels, which again is rejected by modern day Christians. So, this isn't any invention made by Muslims, rather the truth which early gnostic writings made mention of.  Their books wouldn’t matter to Christians, since I’ve given evidence from the Bible itself where babies did speak from the cradle and from theTalmud.