Giving Your Firstborn Son to God

The Torah (Exodus 22:28) commands Israel to give its firstborn sons to God, and makes no mention of redeeming them. What exactly are they being commanded to do?

Dr. Eve Levavi Feinstein

What to Do with Firstborn Sons

Sacrifice Them
Does the Torah require that every firstborn male child be sacrificed to God?

The question seems preposterous, yet this is the plain meaning of a passage in the Covenant Collection found in Parashat Mishpatim (Exodus 22:28-29):

כב:כח מְלֵאָתְךָ֥ וְדִמְעֲךָ֖ לֹ֣א תְאַחֵ֑ר בְּכ֥וֹר בָּנֶ֖יךָ תִּתֶּן לִּֽי:כב:כט כֵּֽן תַּעֲשֶׂ֥ה לְשֹׁרְךָ֖ לְצֹאנֶ֑ךָ שִׁבְעַ֤ת יָמִים֙ יִהְיֶ֣ה עִם אִמּ֔וֹ בַּיּ֥וֹם הַשְּׁמִינִ֖י תִּתְּנוֹ לִֽי:

22:28 You shall not put off the skimming of the first yield of your vats.[1] You shall give Me the firstborn among your sons.  22:29 You shall do the same with your cattle and your flocks: seven days it shall remain with its mother; on the eighth day you shall give it to Me.

Although this passage does not use any of the common terms for sacrifice, it draws a clear analogy between the act of “giving” firstborn children to God and “giving” firstborn cattle and sheep, which are presumably destined for slaughter. Nothing in the text suggests that firstborn humans or animals are to be treated any differently from one another.

Redeem Them
Parashat Ki Tissa (Exod 34:19-20), contains what appears to be another iteration of this law—but one that mercifully spares the human child the fate that appears to await him in Mishpatim:

לד:יט כָּל פֶּ֥טֶר רֶ֖חֶם לִ֑י וְכָֽל מִקְנְךָ֙ תִּזָּכָ֔ר פֶּ֖טֶר שׁ֥וֹר וָשֶֽׂה:לד:כ וּפֶ֤טֶר חֲמוֹר֙ תִּפְדֶּ֣ה בְשֶׂ֔ה וְאִם לֹ֥א תִפְדֶּ֖ה וַעֲרַפְתּ֑וֹכֹּ֣ל בְּכ֤וֹר בָּנֶ֙יךָ֙ תִּפְדֶּ֔ה וְלֹֽא יֵרָא֥וּ פָנַ֖י רֵיקָֽם:

34:19 Every first issue of the womb is Mine, from all your livestock that drop a male as firstling, whether cattle or sheep. 34:20 But the firstling of an ass you shall redeem with a sheep; if you do not redeem it, you must break its neck. And you must redeem every firstborn among your sons. None shall appear before Me empty-handed.

This passage as well presents an analogy between the treatment of firstborn animals and humans: all belong to God.^[2] But here the firstborn of an ass—an animal that may not be sacrificed—must be redeemed, or exchanged, for a sheep, and the firstborn of a human mother must likewise be redeemed. This law upholds the principle that all firstborns belong to God, while making a practical distinction between firstborns that are slaughtered on an altar (“kosher” animals) and those that are not (“non-kosher” animals and humans).^[3]

Explaining the Law in Mishpatim:
Traditional Approach

Redeem Them (Pidyon Haben)
Traditional Jewish exegesis assumes that the Torah’s laws agree with each other. Therefore, most traditional scholars interpret the phrase “you shall give me the firstborn among your sons” in line with Exodus 34:20, as a command to redeem the firstborn. For instance, Rashi (1041-1105) states:

בכור בניך תתן לי – לפדותו בחמשה סלעים מן הכהן.

“You shall give me the firstborn among your sons” – redeem him for five coins from the priest.

(Rashi derives the five coin rule from a yet a third source, one of the Priestly versions of this law [Num 18:16]).

Even starker is the comment by R. Tobiah ben Eliezer (11^th cent.) in his Lekach Tov (Exod 22:28):

בכור בניך תתן לי. כמשמעו להיות פודהו ונותן דמיו לכהן:

“You shall give me the firstborn among your sons” – as it sounds: to redeem him and give the money to the priest.

R. Tobiah doesn’t seem to realize that a simple reading of the verse does not yield what he says “it sounds like.” He is so influenced by the other verses that he no longer actually hears what it seems to explicitly say.

Sanctuary Workers
An alternative interpretation of this verse assumes that the firstborn are being commanded to serve God, in the way Priests and Levites will do. R. Obadiah Seforno (ca. 1475-1550) suggests this reading:

בכור בניך תתן לי. לכל עבודת קדש, לעבודת המקדש ולתלמוד תורה כמו שהיה אחר כך בכהנים…

“You shall give me the firstborn among your sons” – for all forms of holy service, whether working in the Temple or studying Torah, as will be done afterwards by the Priests…

Seforno assumes that the verb נ-ת-נ means to give to God as a temple servant; in fact, the same verb is used in 1 Sam 1:11, where Hannah promises to give to God the boy that she is hoping for (ונתתיו לי-הוה). Seforno suggests that Exodus 22:28 represents God’s original plan, to have the firstborn serve him, but this plan changes later when the Levites and Priests take their place.

Oddly, according to this model, the law only remains relevant for a few days. By the time the mishkan is built (which begins in the next parasha), the Levites and the Priests, not the firstborn, will serve as functionaries. In fact, following the traditional conception of when the Torah was written, the law was only put to ink after it was already defunct.

The Analogy to Animals
The traditional responses cited above do not explain why the law in Mishpatim makes it sound as if the rule for firstborn humans is the same as that for firstborn animals. Other traditional sources do address this issue, by relying on another basic hermeneutical assumption, something we might call “the redundancy rule.”^[4] The Torah cannot be redundant, so why is the same law repeated in multiple places? The answer the rabbis generally give is that the repetition is meant to teach us something about the commandment.

For example, Mekhilta de-Rashbi learns from the words “give to me” about the significance of the commandment:

בכור בניך תתן לי יכול יתנם לו ודאי ת”ל ויתן משה את כסף הפדיום לאהרן ולבניו (במ’ ג נא)… אם כן למה נאמר בכור בניך תתן ליכל זמן שאתה נותנו כמצותו מעלה אני עליך כאלו לי נתתו ובזמן שאין אתה נותנו כמצותו מעלה אני עליך כאלו אותי קפחת.

“You shall give me the firstborn among your sons” – perhaps I should give them to [God] in fact? Another verse teaches you (Num 3:51): “And Moses gave the money of their redemption to Aaron and his sons.”… If so, why does it say “you shall give me the firstborn among your sons”? [God is saying:] Whenever you give [the money] as required, I count it as if you gave it to me directly, and whenever you don’t give it as required, I count it as if you shortchanged me directly.

Rashi, quoting Mekhilta deRabbi Ishmael (“Masechta Dekaspa” 19), records a different midrash that derives a new rule about redeeming animals from this verse (Exod 22:28):

והלא כבר צוה עליו במקום אחר, אלא כדי לסמוך לו כן תעשהו לשורך, מה בכור אדם לאחר שלושים יום פודהו שנאמר (במדבר יח טז) ופדויו מבן חדש תפדה, אף בכור בהמה דקה [גסה] מטפל בו שלשים יום ואחר כך נותנו לכהן:

Wasn’t this already commanded somewhere else? Rather, it wishes to juxtapose this law to the words “you shall do the same with your cattle.” Just as the firstborn human is redeemed on his thirtieth day, as it says (Num 18:16): “and his redemption: you shall redeem him a month and older,” so too the firstborn of your animals: you should take care of them for thirty days and then give them to the priest.

Both solutions are classically midrashic: neither has any basis in the simple reading of the text. The need for the midrash underlines the problematic nature of the verse: Is it really possible that the Torah is mandating giving firstborn male humans to God just as firstborn animals are given?

Explaining the Multiple Versions of the Law:
Academic Approach

In contrast to the midrash, critical scholarship does not assume that different instantiations of the same law were originally meant to be read in light of one another. In some cases, one text may be building on another, or one text may be revising or even attempting to polemicize against another.

The relationship between the laws in Mishpatim (ch. 22) and Ki Tissa (ch. 34) is a matter of debate in contemporary scholarship. The laws in Mishpatim are part of what is known as the Covenant Collection, an ancient collection of laws which was included as part of the northern E document. The origin of the laws in Ki Tissa is more complex. Many scholars believe that these laws are an alternate Decalogue (referred to in scholarship as the “Ritual Decalogue”) and that it was part of the J document.^[5] This claim has been challenged of late by redaction-critical scholars such as Shimon Gesundheit, who see the law collection in ch. 34 as a supplement meant to revise the laws in ch. 22.^[6]

If we assume that the law about redeeming the firstborn in Ki Tissa is independent of the law in Mishpatim, then we should not interpret the latter in terms of the former. If it was written in reaction to the law in Mishpatim, then it is revising or even polemicizing against the older law by rewriting it. Either way, we have no choice but to attempt to understand the law in Mishpatim in its own terms.

Interpretation 1:
Exodus 22 as Requiring Child Sacrifice

As stated at the outset, on its own terms, the simplest interpretation of Exodus 22:28 is that it requires the slaughter of all firstborn sons. This is the view taken by many modern biblical scholars, including Jon Levenson, who defends it in his Death and Resurrection of the Beloved Son: The Transformation of Child Sacrifice in Judaism and Christianity.^[7]

Analogy to the Cherem Law in LeviticusThe possibility that the Torah has a law mandating child sacrifice may be shocking, but this would not be the only Torah text to require human sacrifice. The law of the cherem, the donation of something (or someone) to God, found in Leviticus 27 also references something akin to human sacrifice:

כז:כח אַךְ כָּל חֵ֡רֶם אֲשֶׁ֣ר יַחֲרִם֩ אִ֨ישׁ לַֽי-הֹוָ֜ה מִכָּל אֲשֶׁר ל֗וֹ מֵאָדָ֤ם וּבְהֵמָה֙ וּמִשְּׂדֵ֣ה אֲחֻזָּת֔וֹ לֹ֥א יִמָּכֵ֖ר וְלֹ֣א יִגָּאֵ֑ל כָּל חֵ֕רֶם קֹֽדֶשׁ קָֽדָשִׁ֥ים ה֖וּא לַי-הֹוָֽה:כז:כט כָּל חֵ֗רֶם אֲשֶׁ֧ר יָחֳרַ֛ם מִן הָאָדָ֖םלֹ֣א יִפָּדֶ֑ה מ֖וֹת יוּמָֽת:

27:28 But any cherem that a person declares cherem to Yhwh from his property, whether of humans or a beast or of his ancestral field, it shall be neither sold nor redeemed; all cherem is holy of holies unto Yhwh. 27:29 Every human cherem that is declared cherem shall not be redeemed; he shall be put to death.

Here we see explicitly that once a person is dedicated to God, the person must be killed.^[8]The verse explicitly rejects redemption as an option.^[9] On the most straightforward reading, it would seem that the author of Exodus 22:28 held a similar view with regard to firstborn sons.

Examples of Child Sacrifice in the Bible
There are also several narrative texts that seem to portray child sacrifice as a legitimate practice, or at least do not explicitly condemn it:

• God tells Abraham to sacrifice his son (Gen 22). Although in the end God prevents Abraham from going through with the sacrifice, a plain reading of the text does not suggest that child sacrifice is inappropriate. Instead, God praises Abraham for his willingness to offer his son.

• Jephthah makes an oath to sacrifice whoever is first to come out to greet him when he returns home successful from war. It turns out to be his daughter, and this is what he does (Judg 11:39).^[10]

• Mesha, king of Moab, finding that he is about to lose in battle against the combined forces of Israel and Judah, sacrifices his firstborn son and heir, which turns the tide of the battle in his favor (2 Kings 2:27).

Thus, a law requiring child sacrifice seems to be within the bounds of possibility.

Aspirational Law
While it seems that some biblical authors accepted the idea of occasional human sacrifice, killing every firstborn son would seem to be a highly impractical mandate, one that would decimate the Israelite population. Attempting to address this, Levenson argues that biblical laws were probably rarely carried out exactly as written. They were more aspirational than practical. In this case, the law was meant to express the ideal of God’s ultimate ownership of the first and best of all life. Levenson argues that while some Israelites probably did carry out the gruesome practice of child sacrifice, it was likely never a norm for all families.

Interpretation 2:
Temple Service – Seforno with a Twist

Another possible interpretation of the verse is that suggested by Seforno (discussed earlier). Giving a son to God means dedicating him to service at a local sanctuary. It was noted above that following the traditional model, as Seforno does, the law would only have existed for a handful of days because it was ostensibly legislated at Sinai and cancelled upon the building of the mishkan.

Modern scholarship, however, does not follow the historiographical timeline of the Torah. Therefore, the law in Mishpatim may envision a reality in which firstborn serve as functionaries at local sanctuaries, either with Levites and/or Priests or instead of them.

Hannah’s Dedication of Samuel
Whether the practice of dedicating firstborn sons to service was ever widespread is a separate question. The only biblical reference to such an act occurs in the story of Hannah’s dedication of Samuel to the sanctuary at Shiloh, mentioned above, which was in fulfillment of a voluntary vow rather than on obligation on all families. (In this respect, it resembles two of the examples of child sacrifice cited above: Both Jephthah’s sacrifice of his daughter and Mesha’s sacrifice of his son are in fulfillment of vows.) Thus, even if Seforno’s basic interpretation of the law is preferred over Levenson’s, Levenson is probably correct that the law was aspirational and was never in widespread practice.

Although this interpretation would seem to be undermined by the apparently identical treatment of humans and animals in Exodus 22:28, this is not necessarily the case. The phrase “give to me” used for both animals and children focuses on the act of donation rather than ritual slaughter. In fact, it is not clear that the firstborn animals mentioned in this verse are to be immediately slaughtered; they may simply be understood as donations to the sanctuary’s herd.^[11]

Put another way, the analogy between firstborn animals and humans in this verse may suggest that the dedication of a person for service in the sanctuary fell into a broader category of sacred offerings, which included animal sacrifices, the firstfruit offerings (bikkurim) and other types of donations.

Differing Biblical Interpretations:
Ezekiel vs. Numbers 8

Thus far, we have seen two plausible interpretations of the law in Mishpatim: either it mandates the ritual slaughter of firstborn children or it requires that they be dedicated to serve at a sanctuary. I have attributed the former interpretation to the contemporary biblical scholar Jon D. Levenson and the latter to the medieval exegete R. Obadiah Seforno. But there is in fact evidence of both interpretations within the Bible itself.

Ezekiel’s “Bad laws”
Ezekiel 20:25-26 appears to understand the law as mandating the ritual slaughter of firstborn sons.  In this astonishing passage, the prophet states that because the Israelites refused to follow the Lord’s good, life-giving laws, 

וְגַם אֲנִי֙ נָתַ֣תִּי לָהֶ֔ם  חֻקִּ֖ים לֹ֣א טוֹבִ֑ים  וּמִ֨שְׁפָּטִ֔ים לֹ֥א יִֽחְי֖וּ בָּהֶֽם:  וָאֲטַמֵּ֤א אוֹתָם֙ בְּמַתְּנוֹתָ֔ם  בְּהַעֲבִ֖יר כָּל־פֶּ֣טֶר רָ֑חַם  לְמַ֣עַן אֲשִׁמֵּ֔ם  לְמַ֙עַן֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר יֵֽדְע֔וּ אֲשֶׁ֖ר אֲנִ֥י יְ-הֹוָֽה:

I also gave them bad laws, Laws that were not good  and rules by which they could not live.  When they set aside the first issue of every womb  I defiled them by their very gifts— that I might render them desolate,  that they might know that I am Yhwh.

The phrase “the first issue of every womb” here recalls the law of the firstborn in its various iterations, while the term “set aside” (העביר) recalls the prohibitions of burning children as sacrifices to the god Molech in Leviticus 18:21 and Deuteronomy 18:10. The most straightforward understanding of this passage is that, in Ezekiel’s view, God commanded the Israelites to sacrifice every firstborn child as a punishment for not keeping his “good laws.”^[12]

Numbers – Replacing Firstborn Sons with Levites
In contrast, the Priestly source seems to preserve an understanding that firstborn sons were once required to perform sacred service, apparently in a role subordinate to priests, and that they were replaced in this role by the Levites. Numbers 3:12 commands:

וַאֲנִ֞י הִנֵּ֧ה לָקַ֣חְתִּי אֶת הַלְוִיִּ֗ם מִתּוֹךְ֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל תַּ֧חַת כָּל בְּכ֛וֹר פֶּ֥טֶר רֶ֖חֶם מִבְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וְהָ֥יוּ לִ֖י הַלְוִיִּֽם:

I hereby take the Levites from among the Israelites in place of all the firstborn, the first issue of the womb among the Israelites: the Levites shall be Mine.

In Numbers 8, the Levites are formally installed as workers in the mishkan. Significantly, the Levites are presented as a kind of offering: the Israelites place their hands on the Levites’ heads, as one would do with an animal sacrifice, presenting the Levites as an “elevation offering” (tenufah). This suggests that in the eyes of the priestly author, dedicating a person to serve in a sanctuary was conceptually similar to dedicating an animal for ritual slaughter.

Although the function of these texts is to overturn the law in Mishpatim by replacing the firstborn with Levites, it implies that the original role of the firstborn was similar to that which P assigned to the Levites.  They were to serve God at a sanctuary.^[13]

 The Return of Firstborn Life to God

In the end, the biblical evidence does not point to a single conclusive interpretation of the law in Mishpatim. On one hand, it may express a requirement (albeit aspirational) that every Israelite family sacrifice its firstborn son. While it is difficult to accept that the Torah commands the ritual slaughter of children, we can at least see in the commandment’s development an attempt to modify a bad law (as Ezekiel put it) by requiring monetary redemption in place of actual sacrifice (Exodus 34:20).

If, on the other hand, what the law required was service at a sanctuary, it calls for an expansion of our understanding of sacrifice in biblical thought. Indeed, the very plausibility of this interpretation — and the fact of its apparent acceptance by P — argues for a view of sacrifice that is not centrally about slaughter but is equally, if not more, about the act of giving.

In either understanding, the law in Mishpatim expresses the idea that the first of all life properly belongs to God. Underlying its cryptic and challenging mandate we can detect a conviction that every birth, human or animal, is a gift from God, which is to be recognized through a partial, symbolic return of life to its Maker.

[1] The JPS translation ofדמעך  quoted here is based on a connection of דמע with דמעה, “tear,” taking it to refer to liquid products, namely wine and oil, but it may also refer to agricultural produce more generally. See Nahum M. Sarna, The JPS Torah Commentary: Exodus (New York: JPS, 1991), 140–41.

[2] The Priestly texts (Exodus 13, Numbers 3, and Numbers 8) trace the giving of the firstborn to God to the exodus from Egypt, when God killed the Egyptian firstborn sons and animals but allowed the Israelite firstborn to live. Yet the earliest versions of the law, Exodus 22:28–29 and 34:19–20—both non-Priestly texts—make no such connection. Instead, these texts link the law of the firstborn to providing God with the first or best of other agricultural products, suggesting that God’s possession the firstborn is part and parcel of his right to the first and best of all things.

[3] These are not the only texts in the Pentateuch that deal with the firstborn. The books of Exodus (ch. 13) and Numbers (chs. 3, 8, and 18) also discuss what to do with firstborn, and legislate exchanging the firstborn for silver (pidyon haben) or for Levites. See my joint discussion with Zev Farber, “Relegating Redemption of the Firstborn to a One Time Event in the Wilderness.” 

[4] For another discussion of the redundancy rule, see Jonathan Magonet’s TABS essay, “Does the Decalogue Prohibit Stealing?”

[5] See, for example, Richard Elliott Friedman, The Bible with Sources Revealed, (HarperSanFrancisco, 2003), 179.

[6] Shimon Gesundheit, Three Times a Year: Studies on Festival Legislation in the Pentateuch (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012), 12-43 (=ch. 1).

[7] New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993.

[8] To solve this glaring problem Rashi is forced to explain this verse to be referring to a person who has already been sentenced to death:

“כל חרם אשר יחרם וגו’ – (ת”כ) היוצא ליהרג ואמר אחד ערכו עלי לא אמר כלום. מות יומת” – הרי הולך למות לפיכך לא יפדה אין לו לא דמים ולא ערך

[9] For more on this law, see Isaac Sassoon’s TABS essay, “Obliterating Cherem.”  

[10] Although the simple reading of the verse is that Jephthah sacrificed his daughter, the Sages assume that she was merely designated to God as a perpetual virgin but not killed. For a defense of this reading, see Jonathan Magonet’s TABS essay, “Did Jephthah Actually Kill His Daughter?”

[11] I thank Baruch Schwartz for this idea.

[12] Elsewhere Ezekiel takes a very negative view of child sacrifice (e.g., Ezekiel 23:37, 39), albeit in the context of idol worship.

[13] See my TABS essay with Zev Farber for an analysis of these passages, “Relegating Redemption of the Firstborn to a One Time Event in the Wilderness.” 

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

Child sacrifice was commanded of the Israelites by Yahweh, the biblical God.

You shall not delay to offer from the fulness of your harvest and from the outflow of your presses. The first-born of your sons you shall give to me. You shall do likewise with your oxen and with your sheep: seven days it shall be with its dam; on the eighth day you shall give it to me. (Exodus 22:29-30)

The context of this passage concerns offerings and sacrifices, and it says God requires firstborn sons to be literally sacrificed to him. Later on we find Yahweh admitting he commanded this to Ezekiel

Moreover I gave them statutes that were not good and ordinances by which they could not have life; and I defiled them through their very gifts in making them offer by fire all their first-born, that I might horrify them; I did it that they might know that I am the LORD (Yahweh). (Ezekiel 20:25-26)

Disturbing how Yahweh intentionally played with the Israelites to teach them a lesson, later admitting why did he did it.This again goes back to Ezekiel where Yahweh testifies he is a deceiver.

"If any prophets are DECEIVED into giving a false answer, it is because I, the LORD, have DECEIVED them... (Ezekiel 14:9)

In other words Yahweh deceived Moses the Prophet of the Jews and later tried to justify his deeds to what he did to his people. Interesting how Yahweh told Ezekiel of his evil scheme. could it be the later Jews were questioning child sacrifice to Yahweh?

Stephen Atkin's unknown witnesses

Another red herring made by Stephen Atkins a Christian apologist. Stephen out of his desperation makes a statement which will only backfire on him.  Stephen made a Facebook post on Feb 13^th which said the following:

“How many witnesses did Mohammed Pbuh have, when he had his encounter with the angel Gabriel AS?”

Now was Stephen in a sane and sober mode when he made this statement? In order to answer Stephen, we’ll turn the tables round and ask him the same question, but before that lets answer his.

Prophet Muhammed Pbuh did have an encounter with Angel Gabriel Pbuh in Cave Hira. It is true Prophet Muhammed Pbuh was alone in the Cave, but does that make his encounter false due to not having any witness’s and the answer is no.

Prophet Muhammed Pbuh after his encounter and his very first Revelation of the Quran came down straight to his wife Khadijah Ra, who comforted Prophet Muhammed Pbuh. This can be found in Hadith, below is an excerpt from the full Hadith found in Sahih Bukhari Vol. 1, Book 1, Hadith 3

…Then Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) returned with the Inspiration and with his heart beating severely. Then he went to Khadija bint Khuwailid and said, "Cover me! Cover me!" They covered him till his fear was over and after that he told her everything that had happened and said, "I fear that something may happen to me." Khadija replied, "Never! By Allah, Allah will never disgrace you. You keep good relations with your kith and kin, help the poor and the destitute, serve your guests generously and assist the deserving calamity-afflicted ones." Khadija then accompanied him to her cousin Waraqa bin Naufal bin Asad bin 'Abdul 'Uzza, who, during the pre-Islamic Period became a Christian and used to write the writing with Hebrew letters. He would write from the Gospel in Hebrew as much as Allah wished him to write. He was an old man and had lost his eyesight. Khadija said to Waraqa, "Listen to the story of your nephew, O my cousin!" Waraqa asked, "O my nephew! What have you seen?" Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) described whatever he had seen. Waraqa said, "This is the same one who keeps the secrets (angel Gabriel) whom Allah had sent to Moses…(Sahih Bukhari Vol. 1, Book 1, Hadith 3)

Notice from the above Hadith Prophet Muhammed Pbuh told his wife Khadijah Ra “everything that had happened”.  Note this information was told the very same day, which tells us Khadijah Ra was the very forst witness to Prophet Muhammed Pbuh encounter with Angel Gabriel Pbuh.  The Hadith further tells us, Khadijah Ra took Prophet Muhammed Pbuh to het cousin Waraqa bin Naufal whom she informed on what happened. Here we have Prophet Muhammed Pbuh with her in from of her cousin, so everything said to Waraqa would have been heard by Prophet Muhammed Pbuh himself as a confirmation on the event which hapend to him.

Now here’s where Stephen’s entire post crumbles down.

Prophet Muhammed Pbuh was the first witness, he immediately comes down the mountain and tells his wife Khadijah Ra making her the 2nd witness, she Khadijah Ra takes Prophet Muhammed Pbuh to het cousin Waraqh bin Naufal making him the 3^rd witness. Overall, we have 3 witness of the event without any dispute. This was also orally transmitted by Aisha Ra the wife of Prophet Muhammed Pbuh which has been transmitted and found in Sahih Hadith.

We have shown multiple witness’s for the encounter in the cave, so now our question for Stephen Atkins is as follows:

How were the witness for Moses of the Bible when he spoke to Yahweh near the burning bush?

Who witnessed Abraham of the Bible when he scarified his son Isaac? Can you confirm who saw Isaac being put on the alter?

Who witnessed Jesus of the Bible being tempted by Satan when he was all alone and when he was taken up the temple?

Who witnessed Jesus of the Bible strengthened by an angel when he was praying in the gardern of Gethsemane? Note your book say’s “all his disciples were sleeping from sorrow”, so who were the witnesses?

Who witnessed Mary Magdalene enter the tomb to find it empty? Who witnessed Mary Magdalene seeing Jesus of the Bible as a gardener, was she not alone when this happened, so who was her witness?

Those are just a few points on who witnessed them. since we’ve answered Stephen Atkins query it’s time he answered us. Remember we showed him a minimum of 3 witnesses, all Stephen has to do is show us the same

Jews concealing their scriptures

And they measure not the power of Allah its true measure when they say: Allah hath naught revealed unto a human being. Say (unto the Jews who speak thus): Who revealed the Book which Moses brought, a light and guidance for mankind, which ye have put on parchments which ye show, but ye hide much (thereof), and (by which) ye were taught that which ye knew not yourselves nor (did) your fathers (know it)? Say: Allah. Then leave them to their play of cavilling. (Surah 6:91)

We are told in the Quran how the Jews took the revelation which was given to Moses Pbuh, that is the Torah and copied them on parchment, some they showed and most they concealed. Below is couple to example on the Jews hiding such texts. Bear in the second example is taken from the DSS fragments which were "hidden" in jars inside the Qumran caves.

This is a passage from the Mishnah which says the following: “Adam was created alone to teach you that whoever takes a human life is considered by the Bible to have destroyed an entire world. And whoever saves a human life is considered by the Bible as if he preserved an entire world (Sanhedrin 4.5).

Take attention to the second line from the saying 

"that whoever takes a human life is considered by the Bible to have destroyed an entire world"

it says, "whoever takes a human life of a Israeli is considered BY THE BIBLE as destroying the entire world" Can any Christians show us from their "inerrant, preserved Bible", such saying? Where can we find such a saying from the Bible which says, "killing one Israeli is like killing the whole world?"

It's clear from the Mishna this "verse" was part of the Torah so what happened to it? Seems clear it was concealed and instead taken out and made part of the oral tradition.

The second and most appealing evidence of concealment is from the following which is actually found in the present Bible, however with a distortion.

"Behold my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations. (Isaiah 42:1)

אֶתְמָךְ־ Etmc in Hebrew is used for servant. Interestingly the DSS fragments which were found in the Qumran caves don’t use the word אֶתְמָךְ־ Etmc, rather it says Ahmd אחמד.

The original reading should read

Behold my servant, (Ahmd אחמד) Ahmed, my chosen, in whom my soul delights; I have put my Spirit upon him; he will bring forth justice to the nations. (Isaiah 42:1)

 This is an amazing discovery proving the Jews concealing the scriptures written down.  Its been long issue for Christians who kept bringing up Sanhedrin 4:5 claiming the Muslim Scriptures copied from the Talmud, but this clam is false, and evidence shows the Talmudic text was actually part of the Torah which the Jews kept out. (The Great Isaiah Scroll (1QIsa^{a )} Isaiah 42:1 is a perfect example on Jews concealing the truth. The text found in the oldest fragment explicitly says (Ahmd אחמד), but with no hesiatation the Jews changed the name to  אֶתְמָךְ־ Etmc as found in the Masoretic version. 

We can conclude the Jews really played their deceptive part in changing and altering the Hebrew Bible.

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

Don't you just hate with when Christians bring up the everlasting covenant when trying to prove a point. let us use the same method, but this time from an earlier source. see if they like it.

Isaiah 42 is speaking of the descendants of Kedar (the son of Ismail As)

"I, the LORD, have called you in righteousness; I will take hold of your hand. I will keep you and will make you to be a covenant for the people and a light for the Gentiles, (Isaiah 42:6 Masoretic)

Notice a major game changing variant reading for verse 6 in the DSS

According to Isaiah 42:6 from the DSS text the covenant of Genesis 17:19-21 was abrogated

“I, Yahweh, have called you in righteousness,and will hold your hand, and will keep you, and make you a covenant forever as a light for the nations; (Isaiah 42:6 DSS Qumran Cave 4)

The DSS reads "make you a covenant forever"

It implies the first covenant was temporary and limited in scope (Children of Israel only). Whereas the covenant God is making with the Servant is permanent("make you a covenant forever...") and for the whole world ("...as a light for the nations").

Combine with verse 4:

"He will not fail nor be discouraged, until he has set justice in the earth, and the islands will wait for his law.”

The Hebrew word for "law" is Torah. The islands are waiting for a Torah. If it's referring to the existing Torah of Moses then the islands would not need to wait as it was already available. Clearly this is something new that will reach far and wide.

The Arab or gentile to the Jews has been "specifically given a covenant by God forever. Thus, the covenant of Isaac has been abrogated they (Christians) think the Masoretic Hebrew is more accurate as it "fits better" but the Hebrew of the DSS has two extra letters which changes meaning from "people" to "forever".

Gives you a reason why the Christians reject the DSS Torah

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

 

Moses chose seventy men from among his people for Our appointment and, when they were seized by an earthquake, he cried, “My Lord! Had You willed, You could have destroyed them long ago, and me as well. Will You destroy us for what the foolish among us have done? This is only a test from You—by which You allow whoever you will to stray and guide whoever You will. You are our Guardian. So forgive us and have mercy on us. You are the best forgiver. (Surah 7:155)

 

 Compare to what the bible says

 

But Moses entreated the LORD his God, saying, “O LORD, why does Your anger burn against Your people, whom You brought out of the land of Egypt with great power and a mighty hand?

 Wherefore should the Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? TURN FROM THY FIERCE WRATH, AND REPENT OF THIS EVIL AGAINST THY PEOPLE

 And the LORD REPENTED of the evil which he thought to do unto his people. (Exodus 32: 11-12-14)

 

 SubhanAllah. The Quran clearly shows how the Hebrew bible lied against God.

 And who is more unjust than he who invents a lie about Allah ? Those will be presented before their Lord, and the witnesses will say, "These are the ones who lied against their Lord." Unquestionably, the curse of Allah is upon the wrongdoers. (Surah 11:18)

 And indeed, there is among them a party who alter the Scripture with their tongues so you may think it is from the Scripture, but it is not from the Scripture. And they say, "This is from Allah ," but it is not from Allah. And they speak untruth about Allah while they know. (Surah 3:78)

 

Surah 7:160 and compare with Numbers 20:7-12

Surah 28:48-49 / Scrolls both scripture / Torah, Moses. Both books

 

48. But when the truth came to them from Us, they said, “If only he was given the like of what was given to Moses.” Did they not disbelieve in what was given to Moses in the past? They said, “Two works of magic backing one another.” And they said, “We are disbelieving in both.”

 

49. Say, “Then bring a scripture from God, more conductive to guidance than both, and I will follow it, if you are truthful.” (Surah 28:48-49)

 

 

-------------------------- 

 

 

29. Recall when We dispatched towards you a number of jinn, to listen to the Quran. When they came in its presence, they said, “Pay attention!” Then, when it was concluded, they rushed to their people, warning them.

 

30. They said, “O our people, we have heard a Scripture, sent down after Moses, confirming what came before it. It guides to the truth, and to a straight path.

 

31. O our people! Answer the caller to God, and believe in Him; and He will forgive you your sins, and will save you from a painful punishment.” (Surah 46:29-31)

 

 

 

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

 

35. Does he possess knowledge of the unseen, and can therefore foresee?

36. Or was he not informed of what is in the Scrolls of Moses? (Surah 53:35-36)

 

 

---------

 

   

They do not value God as He should be valued, when they say, "God did not reveal anything to any human being." Say, "Who revealed the Scripture which Moses brought—a light and guidance for humanity?" You put it on scrolls, displaying them, yet concealing much. And you were taught what you did not know—neither you, nor your ancestors. Say, "God;" then leave them toying away in their speculation. (Surah 6:91)

 

 

-----------

 

 

18. This is in the former scriptures.

19. The Scriptures of Abraham and Moses. (Surah 87:18-19)