The Torah (Jews and Muslims)

[Union]

II Samuel 10:18 >>
18. And the Arameans fled before Israel; and David slew of the Arameans, seven hundred chariots, and forty-thousand horsemen, and Shobach the captain of his host he smote, and he died there.

I Chronicles 19:18 >>
18. And the Arameans fled from before Israel, and David slew of the Arameans [the men of] seven thousand chariots and forty thousand foot soldiers, and he put Shophach the general to death.

Any explanation ?

 

[dantech]

You no doubt intended to say "recognized by Israeli law governing the Jewish people in Israel." From Wikipedia ...

​

It took a while for me to understand what you were talking about, I didn't realize i didn't take the "in Israel" part, because I took it from the short description that is showed on Google under the link, and it stopped right before. But yes, you are right.

Which manuscript is designated kosher by Israels Chief Rabbinate is entirely worthless in any scholarly discussion of biblical transmission. That there is a "pluriformity" (Emanuel Tov) of textual variants is common knowledge. All talk to the contrary is simply an appeal to the No True Scotsman fallacy.

What I failed to mention is that I only argue on behalf of the Orthodox community, because frankly, I don't agree, with the little I know of, with Reform communities. I think Conservatives are a lot closer to Orthodoxy, but I still don't accept all their ideologies.

 

[dantech]

II Samuel 10:18 >>
18. And the Arameans fled before Israel; and David slew of the Arameans, seven hundred chariots, and forty-thousand horsemen, and Shobach the captain of his host he smote, and he died there.

I Chronicles 19:18 >>
18. And the Arameans fled from before Israel, and David slew of the Arameans [the men of] seven thousand chariots and forty thousand foot soldiers, and he put Shophach the general to death.

Any explanation ?

This is not Torah...

Torah means the 5 first books of the "Old" Testament.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

What I failed to mention is that I only argue on behalf of the Orthodox community, because frankly, I don't agree, with the little I know of, with Reform communities. I think Conservatives are a lot closer to Orthodoxy, but I still don't accept all their ideologies.

dantech, this is not about ideology but about peer reviewed scholarship. The DSS manuscripts are not forgeries planted by the Reform and Conservative movement in league with some secular cabal. They are documents that inform (and constrain) our understanding of the textual transmission of Torah and many related documents.

 

[Union]

This is not Torah...

Torah means the 5 first books of the "Old" Testament.

Sorry , I knew that . It was from Nevi'im - Prophets and K'tuvim - Scriptures . Just a curiosity though . Never mind , we can discuss this somewhere...

 

[dantech]

dantech, this is not about ideology but about peer reviewed scholarship. The DSS manuscripts are not forgeries planted by the Reform and Conservative movement in league with some secular cabal. They are documents that inform (and constrain) our understanding of the textual transmission of Torah and many related documents.

Are you saying the Dead Sea Scrolls do not contain the same text as what we have today? I have never really researched and took the time to look deeply into the subject. But a quick Google Search of the words Torah and Dead Sea Scrolls, found me this :

Among these scrolls, at least parts of all of the books of the Old Testament were found except for Esther. These manuscripts date to the second to third centuries BC. They thus predated by 1000 years the oldest copies we had previously (Bruce, p. 298). Upon comparison, there was found to be no substantial differences between these two sets of manuscripts (McDowell, pp. 57-58).

For example, "Even though two copies of Isaiah discovered in Qumran Cave I near the Dead Sea in 1947 were a thousand years earlier than the oldest dated manuscript previously known (A.D.980), they proved to be word for word identical with our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95 percent of the text. The 5 percent of variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and variations of spelling" (Archer, p.25).

I may be wrong because, like I said, I haven't done a whole lot of research on the Dead Sea Scrolls. If you have anything interesting, let me know.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I may be wrong because, like I said, I haven't done a whole lot of research on the Dead Sea Scrolls. If you have anything interesting, let me know.

Yes, you are wrong.
Yes, you haven't done a lot of research.

As for the rest, I've mentioned Tov and have no doubt that you will avoid pursuing it.

 

[TheKnight]

To me, there are to many secrets and codes hidden in the Torah for it to be a human creation. And to me, if the Torah is found to not actually be divine, then my whole belief in Judaism no longer makes any sense and can be ignored from then on.

This is tragic to me. The power and awesomeness of the message of Judaism is not hinged upon the divinity of the Torah. That you would forsake your practice on the discovery that the Torah is not divine suggests to me that you don't truly value what the Torah says, nor do you value your practice. It seems to suggest that you do it because you feel obligated to, not because you want to or are genuinely interested in ot.

After all, if you value what it teaches then its origin is of no consequence.


That being said, my personal opinion on the matter is that it isn't all that relevant where it came from. What is presented therein is extremely complex, beautiful, and enticing. My limited amount of study on the subject leads me to believe that the Torah was probably written by at least one human being if not more. That being said, I don't believe the Torah was handwritten by God and given to anyone to pass on. That being said, I don't think that those human(s) who were involved in the writing of the Torah were inspired by anything less than their experiences of the divine.

 

[dantech]

Yes, you are wrong.
Yes, you haven't done a lot of research.

As for the rest, I've mentioned Tov and have no doubt that you will avoid pursuing it.

I will not "avoid" pursuing it, but it will take time because i have a lot of other things to read first.

This is tragic to me. The power and awesomeness of the message of Judaism is not hinged upon the divinity of the Torah. That you would forsake your practice on the discovery that the Torah is not divine suggests to me that you don't truly value what the Torah says, nor do you value your practice. It seems to suggest that you do it because you feel obligated to, not because you want to or are genuinely interested in ot.

After all, if you value what it teaches then its origin is of no consequence.


That being said, my personal opinion on the matter is that it isn't all that relevant where it came from. What is presented therein is extremely complex, beautiful, and enticing. My limited amount of study on the subject leads me to believe that the Torah was probably written by at least one human being if not more. That being said, I don't believe the Torah was handwritten by God and given to anyone to pass on. That being said, I don't think that those human(s) who were involved in the writing of the Torah were inspired by anything less than their experiences of the divine.

I disagree, I think and truly believe that Judaism is 100% based on the Torah being God's word.

If it is humanly, then what good is it for us to not eat pork? Why can't we light fire on the Sabbath? I don't mean I do these things because I feel I have too... I actually do these things because I believe a perfect, all-knowing, ever-living, all-powerful being gave me these laws, gave me this text and simply wants to me to follow it.
I don't always know why... things don't always make sense, but I think of myself as a child who can't always understand why an adult would want me to do a certain thing. Just like any good child, I want to please my parents and accomplish anything they ask of me because I love them unconditionally and want to please them no matter what. Same thing with God. He gave me a text which contains laws. If this HOLY text is not perfect, then it is NOT holy. Why would I not eat a (very tasty looking) lobster if the one asking me not too, is at the same level as me and should have no knowledge, experience, authority over me.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

If this HOLY text is not perfect, then it is NOT holy.

So, ...

HOLY = PERFECT​

How then do you understand Deuteronomy 7:6:

• For you are a holy people to the Lord, your God: ...

... or the holiness of a child?

 

[Rational_Mind]

You keep saying this, but I am not so sure since you don't back it up... What is even more annoying, is that you said earlier, this is not a thread about the Quran, it is about the Torah. If you would like to start comparing the two, then please, start a new thread in which we can.

"Because of the level of care, precision, and re-examination of the Torah text used every time it is copied or even read, there is every indication that the text we have today remains remarkably true to the original. This is further demonstrated when we look at the existing variations in different Jewish communities.

During hundreds of years, the Jewish communities of Europe interacted very rarely with those in Northern Africa and the Middle East. Yemenite Jews have been separated and distinct for at least 1500 years, with their own custom prayer books and traditions. However, in all of these communities, less than 15 variations in each of these Torah texts.

What qualifies as a variation are simply spaces between words. in English, an example would be “well being” in one, while “wellbeing” in another. Other changes are letters used merely as pronunciation guides. The Ashkenazi community writes one word in Deuteronomy ending with a letter “aleph,” while the Sephardic community ends it with a “hey.” But both letters are silent at the end of a word, so both pronounce the word the same way."

We Jews don't call it Hebrew but it is very similar. We call it Lashon HaKodesh (Holy Language). The majority of the words have the same root as they wood in Hebrew, but there are some differences between the two. I think scientists call it Ancient Hebrew. This is not opinion, it is fact. I am not so sure what you would call this language, but I know for sure which language it is.

I know for sure about it stating that the laws are forever. The Torah itself, I would need to look into it and let you know because I obviously don't know the whole Torah by heart. Quick question though, You believe as a Muslim that the Psalms of David are a holy revelation, do you not? In the Psalms it does indeed say that we are to protect the Torah forever.

Except for translations, a few spaces and silent letters that vary, then yes.
There are also some sects that have chosen to edit it so that it matches their individual history, these Torahs are not seen as Kosher to the Chief Rabbinate of Israel (an authority recognized by law as the supreme halakhic and spiritual authority for the Jewish people).

A study of the Bible reveals that it does not contain the exact words
revealed and spoken by the Prophets such as Moses and Jesus. It was
committed to writing by numerous writers during a period of many
centuries during which time it also underwent changes. Dr. Stanley
Cook writes:
"Human fallibility being what it is, the Bible is not free from
contradictions and errors, and is by no means of equal religious
value throughout."
(pg. 193 An Introduction to the Bible)

Again the eleventh edition of the Encyclopaedia Brittanica states
under the title Bible:
"...it is beyond dispute that a large number of corruptions were
introduced into the Hebrew text."

We learn from the history of Israel that during the time of
Nebuchchadnezzar the books of Israel were burnt and destroyed.
Later they were re-written by the Prophet Ezra:
"It was forgotten but Ezra restored it."
(p. 322, Vol. V, Jewish Encyclopaedia)

It is further written on the same page:
"He showed his doubts concerning the correctness of some
words of the text by placing dots over them. Should Elihah, said
he, approve the text, the points will be disregarded. Should he
disapprove, the doubtful words will be removed from the
text."

This needs no further comment of mine. It is clear that the general
text of the Old Testament could no longer be regarded as the Word of
God preserved in its pristine purity. Such is the state of the Old
Testament.

http://www.reviewofreligions.org/download/RR198809.pdf

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I understand that this pleases you greatly because you feel that it somehow renders Islam superior to Judaism. It's a rather childish inference.

 

[Union]

We found in Torah that GOD had given Moses and his people the law of burnt offerings at the Mount Sinai :
Lev.7-
37 This is the torah of the olah (burnt offering), of the minchah (grain offering), and of the chattat (sin offering), and of the asham (trespass offering), and of the ordination offerings, and of the zevach hashelamim (sacrifice of the peace offerings);
38 Which Hashem commanded Moshe on Mt. Sinai, in the day that He commanded the Bnei Yisroel to offer their korbanot unto Hashem, in the Sinai Desert.

But in the latter books , e.g. , in Jermiah it was told that GOD never ordained the laws of burnt offering to Moses and his people . In conjunction HE said instead listening to HIM , the people of Moses disobeyed HIM and followed the rituals the way they wanted :
Jer.7-
21 Thus saith Hashem Tzva’os, Elohei Yisroel; Add your olot unto your zevakhim, and eat basar.
22 For I spoke not unto Avoteichem, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of Eretz Mitzrayim, concerning olah or zevach;
23 But this thing I commanded them, saying, Obey My voice, and I will be for you Elohim (your G-d), and ye shall be My people; and walk ye in kol HaDerech that I have commanded you, l’ma’an (in order that) it may go well with you.
24 But they paid heed not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in the inclinations of the stubbornness of their lev harah (evil heart), and went backward, and not forward.

Those passages from Lev.7 and Jer.7 in contradiction .Probably Prophet Jermiah explained why they are in contradiction :
Jer.8-
8 How can ye say, We are chachamim (wise ones), and the torat Hashem is with us, when, hinei, the et sheker (deceiving pen) of the sofrim (scribes) has made it [the torat Hashem] into sheker (a falsehood).
9 The chachamim (wise men) are ashamed, they are dismayed and trapped; they have rejected the Devar Hashem; so what chochmah (wisdom) is in them?

Please share your thoughts . There might be having some explanation to skip this difficulty .

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Yep. Jeremiah was pretty upset. Thanks for sharing.

 

[dantech]

So, ...

HOLY = PERFECT​

How then do you understand Deuteronomy 7:6:

• For you are a holy people to the Lord, your God: ...

... or the holiness of a child?

no... Perfect does not mean Holy.

But for the Torah to be Holy, it needs to be perfect. I don't believe in following a law, out of the goodness of my heart, to please a human being who maybe would have been happy, 3000 years ago, when he was still alive... I do however consider it my sacred responsibility to accomplish as many Mitzvot as I can, because I do believe the greatest being gave them to Moses, to give to my forefathers, to give to me.

Just a side note, from what I keep finding on the web, it says the Masoretic Text found on the Dead Sea Scrolls is overwhelmingly accurate and as close as its going to get to what we have today, with the few usual exceptions of spaces and silent letters varying. I'm sure your book must be full of information that goes against what I believe, and I guess I'll get to it when i get to it.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

no... Perfect does not mean Holy.

But for the Torah to be Holy, it needs to be perfect.

May I ask why?

 

[dantech]

http://www.reviewofreligions.org/download/RR198809.pdf

Thank you for ignoring everything I said up to here, and then posting your source.

I don't know how else to prove to you that it could not be corrupted. Every letter, name, verse, paragraph, chapter is counted for and is checked after having written a Torah. The fact that it is written on a leather scroll, and using permanent ink makes it all that much more difficult to corrupt. We recorded exactly what word is in the the beginning, middle, end of each paragraph, book, and the Torah as a whole.

When and if it does happen that we do find mismatches, our leaders have taken upon them hundreds of Torahs to compare, and then select the right verse according to the majority of them, which often is a blowout (like 190 identical, 10 different). The only exception for this, was in the time of Ezra, where they only had 3 Torahs. But Ezra was a prophet and had a revelation from God that his Final draft was to be shared with both the righteous and the not so righteous. So, since then, what are the odds of single corruptions making it through the majority of the Torahs?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Just a side note, from what I keep finding on the web, it says the Masoretic Text found on the Dead Sea Scrolls is overwhelmingly accurate and as close as its going to get to what we have today, with the few usual exceptions of spaces and silent letters varying. I'm sure your book must be full of information that goes against what I believe, and I guess I'll get to it when i get to it.

But all you've managed to say here is that the text close enough to the Masoretic to be characterized as *Masoretic is close to the Masoretic.

* actually, the preferred term is 'Proto-Masoretic'. You might find this of interest.

 

[dantech]

May I ask why?

Because of what it represents. It represents our bond with God. It represents what he wants from us. It is basically the contract we made with him as a people to promise that we will always be bound to him, and him to us. It is His duty and responsibility to make sure, through this bond, that his Holy law that he has given us to follow, forever and ever, is perfect and has not been tampered with. For this reason, if it is not perfect, then it is no longer holy. For this same reason, if we find a Torah today that is not perfect, we need to correct it if possible, and if not, bury it because the Torah should only be available to us in it's perfect and HOLY state.

 

[dantech]

But all you've managed to say here is that the text close enough to the Masoretic to be characterized as *Masoretic is close to the Masoretic.

* actually, the preferred term is 'Proto-Masoretic'. You might find this of interest.

I do. I read some of it, will finish it later. Thanks