What is the Tanakh? Hint: it's not the Old Testament
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 12. 2021
- Study with David: www.biblicalculture.org/hebrew
Donate: www.biblicalculture.org/plans...
Recordings: www.BiblicalCulture.org/recor...
Contact: BiblicalCulture@gmail.com
The word Tanakh is a Hebrew acronym for Torah, Nevi'im, and Ketuvim. This video explains what the Tanakh is, when the tern Tanakh came about, and how the Tanakh is different from the Old Testament.
I found the first reference to the Tanakh from a comment by Jordan Penkower on a forum here: networks.h-net.org/node/28655...
Rabbi Dr. David Moster is the director of the Institute of Biblical Culture and an Adjunct Assistant Professor at the Jewish Theological Seminary. He is the author of "Etrog: How a Chinese Fruit Became a Jewish Symbol." He received his PhD in Hebrew Bible from Bar-Ilan University in Israel, and holds degrees in Bible, Education, and Rabbinics from Yeshiva University and New York University.
Thank you for this. Very helpful and interesting. I'm a Christian and have now subscribed to your channel.
One thing that might be made clearer is the part starting at about 3:00 where you describe where describe where "certain Old Testaments" are based on Greek, Latin and Aramaic, thus being one step removed from the original Hebrew. At least as far back (but not a huge distance beyond there) translations into English have been based on the Hebrew. For example, the (Protestant) King James Version of the Tanakh is translated from the Hebrew, though it was with one eye on previous translations, something that continues today with more modern translations.
Just like biblical and historical evidence proves that jesus and his apostles were vegatarians biblical and historical evidence also proves that the trinity, atonement, original sin and hell are very late misinterpretations and are not supported by the early creed hence its not a part of Christianity I pray that Allah swt revives Christianity both inside and out preserves and protects it and makes its massage be witnessed by all people but at the right moment, place and time
The secred text of the Bible says ye shall know them by their fruits
So too that I say to my christian brothers and sisters be fruitful and multiply
Best regards from a Muslim ( line of ismail )
the modern hebrew is also a step removed from the original hebrew, so even on their level of understanding its up to interpretation and never can be for sure this or that, its flexible as every ancient languages.
@@Georgeos777 Hmm. Agreed modern Hebrew is not the same as ancient Hebrew. However, I'm surprised you claim that we "never can be for sure this or that". All languages are flexible, but that doesn't mean we never know what someone means when they write or say something.
@@AlanCossey i didnt say we cannot, but how to proof without the writer itself which is the only one able to attest if it is meant that way, its simply that one can create many meanings from one root word, i wrote this because today we have this wrong western thinking of things be 100% accurate, look how people think about the bible, most so called christians have zero historical knowledge, dont even know that it wasnt written in english or their mother tongue and think its 100% right translation, which does not exist because translation implies failure, often one hasnt even a word in other languages, from all of this "the book fall perfect from the clouds there comes a literalist understanding of scriptures never meant to be understood literal and the result is constant verbal fights, seperation, wars, torture...
The title is misleading. The Tanakh and the Old Testament have the same content. Though the order of books are different.
So sad to see so much hate in the comments. Although we may differ in the way we think, we all (jews, christians, muslims and others) deserve respect.
Nice, thorough explanation
Very helpful and timely video. I had been curious about the differences beyond just language in both texts, but beyond that I was a bit lost. Thank you for the helpful clarifications!
Glad you enjoyed Lady Lithium
Old Testament does not say Jesus was born in Bethlehem, the New Testament does
@@SaintSergeywhere was he born then
Thanks. I just had not been able to wrap my head around the difference between the Tanakh and Old Testament before this and this definitely helped.
The principal difference is that Vulgata, King James Bible, Luter translation and etc. made not from Masoretic text, but the Old Greek commonly known as Septuaginta, although the proper tem means translation of Tora only, made for the Jewish community of Alexandria in the second century BC. In general there are variations from the Masoretic Text. Beyond that in Ieshayahu(Isaia) there is a statement that "Mashiakh would be born to tisha she lo leida( childless), not batula(virgin). Christians claim that Jews had changed the original text, to deny immaculate conception, although not presenting the such.
Old Testament is a corrupt version of Tanach
"batula" is indeed virgin, and in the text another word is used and the word used is for a young unmarried woman with no children... the "betula" is of course implied in the term.. it's talking about a young jewish woman who is unmarried and childless (how could she not be a virign? as the word doesn't mean widow in the form presented, and in the language of english virgin and maiden are also implied together in historical context) in context of a blessing from God she of course is a virgin, unless you are inventing counter narrative for agenda.
So of course she is a virgin.
The word used says more than just virgin.
It's a word for a young woman looking forward hopefully, there is a corresponding word for an older woman who is widowed and childless, which is a looking backwards in longing in the same book as it speaks to both states of being.
And in the "masoretic" text the liberty of adding a verb in a certain passage of the Psalms etc.. where the verb doesn't exist in the text, nor does it make sense in the corresponding answer to the psalmist.
Christians do not claim to know if it was intentional, or earnest translation error, in regards to more than one discrepancy. Claiming they do, is called generalizing.
That's like saying Jews love hinduism, because some do, or Christians love rated R movies because some watch them.
Mainstream Christians mostly do not even know the text. Nor do mainstream Jews. @@gregoryticker4137
@@DavidJosephBoth There are two texts -Massoretic which is using OSHA she lo leida- childless, and there is Septuagint, which is the TRANSLATION into Old Greek. Jews tell you for couple of Millenia, that translation is wrong, and Christians don't know better, starting from so called 'Fathers of Church", to reply that malefectoros Yds, intentionally corrupted scripture to deny New Israel any legitimacy. I'd like to bring to your attention that the birth of the child to a childless woman in the Judaism is considered a sign of the Divine blessing of the child and his miraculous future starting from Yizhak, Shimshon, Samuel ha Navi, David haMeleh, and all the way to biographies of hassidic rabanim. On the contrary, to the goy brought up in so called Greeko-Roman civilization, the standard feature of the hero's or some god's biography is birth after the copulation of say Zeus in the shape of an animal with a woman. The whole story of immaculate conception is reeking with the accident of Leda and the Swan, which for any New then and now is unspicable filth and abomination. Sincerely yours an Ignorant Jew according to your definition.
@@ReubenIsrael123that’s not what this video is claiming at all though so where did you get that information?
Very accurate and educational. Thanks!
@lir2037 ??
Thankyou, so interesting. How do I contact someone at this site?
BiblicalCulture@gmail.com Glad you enjoyed
Very clear explanation. Thank you!
Great insights, thanks!
Shalom, I would like to ask if you know if some parts of the Genesis are the same as what is written in the Hindu Rg Veda, or if you ever heard of it before.
So I've heard that the multiple mentions of Jesus and John the Baptist about Abraham, Lot, Isaac and Jacob are actually also connected with the Rg Veda and not only with the Quran.
Thanks
Nope, never heard of such a thing.
Could you please recommend a Tanakh with the largest Hebrew font?
With gratefulness.
I wish I could. Many synagogues have large print chumashim (Pentateuchs) for the Torah, though I’ve never seen one for the entire Tanakh. I would search for Jewish agencies that help the visually impaired. Good luck and let me know what you find.
@@BiblicalCulture
The LORD has blessed your heart.
Rabbi, when did the word *Torah* come to refer specifically to the Pentateuch?
Before that, did it often refer to all instructions/law?
Im not sure if I'm adequately answering your question, but the term torah - i suspect - predates the term 'pentateuch'. Im muslim and the quran does make reference to the torah
Probably by the time it was written. You can see in Kings that they refer to "the Torah scroll", which is probably Deuteronomy, which we know from its contents was always called Deuteronomy (bonus points for the "onomy" in Deuteronomy translating the word Torah...)
@@adrianblake8876 Deuteronomy is now called Devarim (words) in Hebrew. It was probably called Torah when it was first written, based on 2 Kings 22:8.
When the Tanakh was compiled, the Pentateuch was identified as Torah, afaik, and it seems it would have had to have been know that way for at least a little while before that. Maybe not.
@@scienceexplains302 I was referring to the traditional name, "Mishne Torah", which translates to Greek as "Deuteronomy", and is explicitly written in Deuteronomy 17:18
@@element2138 Torah literally means instruction/law. It didn’t necessarily mean the same thing to the authors of Deuteronomy as it does to you now.
When the Tanakh was first compiled, Torah referred to the Pentateuch. The author(s) of Deuteronomy were probably referring only to Deuteronomy, and maybe to an earlier version than we have now
Fantastic video. Thank you.
Best Video on CZcams!
Best comment on CZcams! יישר כח
Thanks david great presentation.I also dont like the term old testament,I use the term Original.shalom peace to all
Great explanation! Thanks!
Hello and Shalom. Thank you for your content; you are very knowledgable and your teaching (all I've seen so far) has a spirit of humility and gentleness, and your love and joy for God and the Tanakh are evident and encouraging.
That said, I have a couple points to share which I offer in all humility for you to consider. תֵּ֣ן לְ֭חָכָם וְיֶחְכַּם־עֹ֑וד הֹודַ֥ע לְ֝צַדִּ֗יק וְיֹ֣וסֶף לֶֽקַח
The first is that the protestant Old Testament in pretty much any modern English translation is actually using the Hebrew Masoretic text as its base to translate from (which you did somewhat mention). However, the Septuagint was actually a Jewish production predating the Christian era, and was made by Jews for Diaspora Jews outside of Israel whose children, grandchildren and subsequent generations were increasingly non-native Hebrew speakers. This translation was very much to the Jews of the ancient world what the JPS Tanakh in English is to American Jews today. The Latin Vulgate (the official Catholic translation up to the Protestant Reformation) was similarly based on the Hebrew text as were mostly all European language translations (Spanish, French, German, etc.) from the Reformation and after (ca. early 1500's onward).
The second point is regarding the name 'Old Testament'. You mentioned that the name 'Old Testament' implies something "old, just waiting for something new". What I can tell you from a Messianic Jewish perspective is that Messianic Jews and Christians don't mean it in that way. To us the 'Old' doesn't at all mean 'outdated' or no longer having value, or simply waiting for something new. Rather, we see the Tanakh as having supreme value and divine authority, and in no way less authoritative or valuable than the New Testament. The key is in the word 'Testament'. 'Testamtent' is the older English rendering of the Greek word 'Diatheke', both of which correspond to (or translate) the beautiful Hebrew word found in the Tanakh -B'rit - ברית (often also translated 'Covenant'). We believe God has fulfilled the promise spoken in the Tanakh regarding his covenant with his people Israel:
"Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, "Know the Lord," for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more." -Jeremiah 31:31-34
We believe this New B'rit/Covenant/Testament has been enacted by the Messiah, something which the Tanakh also promised. In the Tanakh it says the Messiah would come before the destruction of the second Temple in Jerusalem, according to Daniel chapter 9.
-here's an article to help explain that: www.oneforisrael.org/jewish-evangelism/daniel-9-when-will-the-messiah-come/
We believe that Yeshua (Jesus) is the promised Messiah for our and all peoples, as the Tanakh promised. If it is not Yeshua, who could it be, since the Temple was destroyed shortly after him? And who could possibly come now and bring Torah to more Gentiles than Jesus has? The Tanakh and New Testament together as the Bible is the most read, most studied, most purchased, most given-away, most quoted, most printed book, by far in human history; and it has been for almost 2000 years. If not Yeshua, then who? A third of all humanity today believes in the Tanakh because of him.
I would humbly encourage you to check out the work of Israeli scholar Dr. Golan Broshi, or Jewish-American scholars Dr. Seth D. Postell, or Dr. Michael Brown on this subject. They've done great work to show how the Tanakh actually supports this, as well as how to reconcile this with early Judaism and the writings of the Sages.
So, I would respectfully say that Messianic Jews and Christians, for the most part, understand the Old Testament/Covenant (Tanakh) in this way; not as 'old' as in outdated, but as the first and precious set of revelations by God to his people Israel that would usher in the Messiah, who would enact the New Covenant with Israel and all people forever.
Thank you again for your important work of helping people to learn and understand Tanakh in its original language and context. Sorry for such a long comment.😊
Blessings to you!
Bro, sorry to tell you.
Messianic jew are just Christians.
Jesus is not nothing.
Accept that we won't accept him, and that's it.
We won't violate the Ten Commandments!
You explained this so well that I do not have much to say. You are correct is your explanation of the origins and precedence of the Holy Books, both the Old and the New.
The issue with people who take the stance this person has is their view and understand of the holy scripts of the OT and the manuscripts of the NT. I can tell right away as he does not understand the critical position and reasoning for Malachi being the last part of the Old Testament. It is critical that one understands why it is there and what was happening at the time of Malachi.
The bible is a complete book with pieces that go together perfectly to tell us what was, what is, and what will be. Those who seek to cut parts out are the ones who take their own thoughts above the Truth which the Ruach HaQodesh does lead us to know and understand.
You explained this so well that I do not have much to say. You are correct is your explanation of the origins and precedence of the Holy Books, both the Old and the New.
The issue with people who take the stance this person has is their view and understand of the holy scripts of the OT and the manuscripts of the NT. I can tell right away as he does not understand the critical position and reasoning for Malachi being the last part of the Old Testament. It is critical that one understand why that is, what was going on at the time of Malachi's time, and what happened afterwards.
The bible is a complete book with all pieces fitting perfectly together. It tells us what was, what is, and what will be. Those who try to take pieces of it and delete it or cancel it out are those who are seeing and understanding it in their own ways and are not being led by Holy Spirit/Ruach HaQodesh. They will remain in their confusion, unless they receive Ruach HaQodesh and learn through Him.
Jesus is nothing.
And you took it wrong.
Sorry🤷🏻♂️
@@AyamanAmusic May I respectfully ask, why Jesus is nothing according to you? Or why the things I said are incorrect? Could you please answer some of the points I made? For example, if Daniel 9 says the Messiah would come before the destruction of the second temple, then who could it be now if it wasn't Jesus?
Please can you explain the catholics and orthodox chrisitans why you dont accept the apocryphia from the septuagint?
May I explained the difference between Nevi'im and Ketuvim. The Prophets books were written by Prophecy. And the Writtungs were written by Ruach HaKodesh, but not Prophecy. For non Jews some of the books of Writtings may sound like Prophecies (like Daniel) but aren't.
What about the bits of Daniel that sfaik only exist in Aramaic?
What about it? They were written in Babylon, in the Babylonian dialect of Aramaic. The following video may help:
czcams.com/video/6Aqp23Q77FI/video.htmlsi=bwdpL5jZ1y2BBbNV
I feel like more people should know about this. I always thought the hebrew bible and the first half of the christian bible were the same. I am super interested in seeing what the differences are in the stories and thier meaning and how they are interpreted and expressed.
Also if you see my comment, I feel like we should have a new word for the "old testament". I certainly don't want to offend anyone. But for those of us like me who are interested in comparing the two, I feel like there should be a new title that is agreeable to both religions.
Is "The Hebrew Scriptures" acceptable?
I noticed several videos about this issue, on the terrific House Of Lev channel. This was among a series of issues and events which changed their lives.
(Ezekiel36:5 )...Count your days Converts ⏳ 🔥. Qam Yasharahla ✊🏿
HalleluYah 🙌🏾 the days are coming... perhaps here 👀 ⏰
Question for you, who are the People of Genesis 15:13? Thanks.
Very simple.
The Children of Israel.
(from a Hebrew speaking jewish scholar)
@@AyamanAmusic Are the Children of Israel the same as the Children that God raises from '' those '' stones on Matthew3:9, Luke3:8, or again in John8:39 when Jesus says:
“If you were Abraham’s children,” Jesus told them, “you would do what Abraham did.
Even thou He told them just 2 verses before on the same chapter in John8:37: I know you are descendants of Abraham, but you are trying to kill me because my word has no place among you?
So being descendants and Children are not the same because '' you would do what Abraham did ''?
What is That One Thing that Abraham did?
Even if you don't have much reading on the New Testament I would sure appreciate a thought of yours on this somehow Abrahamic thought from Jesus and John the Baptist please.
Shalom
@MetaphysicalZero @MetaphysicalZero I didn't understand a word. Sorry, it's just make no sense.
What stone? What is Abraham did?
You realize you came with a claim on my religion with knowledge of my religion only through your religion eyes? And expect me to answer that? And then what? Prove to me that I'm wrong and turn me to worship Jesus?
Sorry if I seem hostile, but I don't like those missionaries' tricks.
@@AyamanAmusic Please don't think it like that, it is not meant to give that direction of thought of you thinking of missionaries or claiming that you should worship Jesus whatever. Jesus speaks about El Elyon so we don't talk about different subjects.
I just wanted to know if you have read this part of the Gospels about Abraham that is spoken of, and wanted to have your opinion on that.
Since it seems that you don't read it before and don't want to talk about it too I just say sorry for the inconvenience.
Shalom
where can I buy tanakh book the very used in israel?
Search for “Tanakh” or “Tanach” on Amazon or any other bookseller. In Israel it would be Hebrew only, meaning no translation.
Do you mean the Greek septuagant translated by Jewish rabbi is not representative of the Hebrew text?
Can you say that the message being conveyed in the Greek version differs significantly from the Hebrew?
Is the message lost?
This is what Muslims keep saying when cornered they tell you you don't know Arabic so you can't understand this .
But the overall facts in the tanakh and Quran can make sense in another language with a few words presenting issues but not claiming others can't understand
No translation is ever *exactly* the same as the original, so yes, the Greek is somewhat different from the Hebrew.
Is the Torah before the tanakh? Thank u
The Torah is the first 5 books of the Tanakh, which stands for Torah-Neviim-Ketuvim (Torah-Prophets-Writings). Hope this helps.
@@BiblicalCulture so they’re two different books? Sorry so many questions 😅 every time I look up Tanakh the Hebrew Torah keeps showing.
@@CAPTINjacksparrow They can be. The Tanakh has the Torah in it. The Tanakh has three books in it, it is why the Tanahk is over 1,000 pages.
@@CAPTINjacksparrow The Tanach (Hebrew Bible) contains 24 books, of which the first five (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy) are known as the Torah.
I removed “Old Testament” from my vocabulary. “Old” implies “outdated” or even worse “obsolete”
Isn't it though? If you try to follow the old testament word by word you would end up genociding your neighboors like what Israel is doing. It is a horribly violent book that has no respect for human rights and dignity. Total opposite of the new testament.
Well my dear neighbor the old testament is obsolete as we have Holy Spirit in us to help us try to keep the new testament law. Old testament is for learning. We are saved by grace through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone. Works and avoiding sin are for rewards, avoiding discipline, avoiding grieving and quenching the holy Spirit and, to avoid sowing to the flesh reaping corruption and instead sowing to the Holy Spirit reaping eternal life.
My friend, I fear you are mistaken and it is sad that so many Christians shun the first (old) testament, which, while not written to us, was written for us. Albeit the writings in out first testament are ordered differently, they are the scriptures Jesus, Paul and others used to preach the gospel, Jesus even declared that these scriptures pointed to Him.
There are too many scripture references to cite here in support of Christians reading the first testament, but perhaps a good one to start is Acts 20:26-27 where Paul states his innocence regarding the blood of the Ephesian leaders because he had declared the full counsel of G-d; what is the full counsel of G-d? Surely, it is all of G-d's purposes in salvation history as revealed in (all) scripture.
I enjoy reading the first testament, particularly where there is a revelation or foreshadowing of Messiah plus the glorious promises of not only His coming, but His coming again.
I hope you don't ignore the first testament but begin to both read and appreciate it 2 Timothy 3:16-17
I did too. I call it now-
The only Testament.
@@johncena12366
Then you didn't read the same book as I did, or you clearly didn't understand what you read. As for what Israel is doing now is perfectly right.
Also, "the new testament" can not be true, if "the old testament" is not true.
And if the "old testament" is true, than "the new testament" can not be true.
Thank you ,kind sir
You’re welcome!
Is the Tanakh inspired by the Holy Spirit? Is second Timothy 3: 16 and 17 not true?
No.
Luke 44:44-47 describes the Tanakh: Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all the things that are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” 45 Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, 46 and He said to them, “So it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, 47 and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem. Moreover, Jeremiah did proclaim a new coveant in chapter 31:31-34 “Behold, days are coming,” declares the Lord, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers on the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,” declares the Lord. 33 “For this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares the Lord: “I will put My law within them and write it on their heart; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 34 They will not teach again, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them,” declares the Lord, “for I will forgive their wrongdoing, and their sin I will no longer remember.”
Keep in mind that the writings of Luke, is much older then what you described as the second rabbinic bible. It does not mentiond Tanakh per se but it does describes it.
Yes, and there are older sources such as Ben Sira that have a tripartite division. But in Luke it’s not clear which books were “in” the Writings and which books were “out”. He simply says “Psalms.”
The 2nd Rabbinic Bible is not the oldest Tanakh we have, but it’s the first one to combine Torah Nevi’im Ketuvim into the acronym Tanakh תנ״ך. And to be fair, the acronym is buried in a footnote, meaning it would take a while to catch on.
🤨Covenant hasn't been made yet..The HEATHEN is still in the land .. Israel are still in the land of their captivities.Soon come though
@@ktown4751 All Israel is not in Israel Yet!! There is NO other Israel!!
Different languages, different orders, but the same content as the Protestant OT, exactly as you said.
Thanks for your interesting videos, wish you do more on BHS.
Thanks Andrew. I have a few Biblia Hebraica videos planned for 2022 so stay tuned.
The Hebrew may be the same but the Protestant English will badly rape our Torah and desecrate it.
Also it is not the OT. No such thing exists. Our Torah is eternal
Great video, it's unfortunate that Christianity split the books as Old and New Testament. There is no such thing as a testament in the Tanakh or the Messianic Writings, even the new covenant that God makes with Israel and Judah is found in Jeremiah 31 and is specifically made with the Jewish people. Claiming one is old and the other is new makes it seem like there was a new religion created, which the church has certainly done.
Yeshua claims to have enacted this covenant during a Pesach serder the night before his death. I am sorry for the way Gentiles who claim to believe in the same God have done violence to your scriptures and people. Far too many are Biblically illiterate who believe in Yeshua as Messiah.
What do you mean?
Jesus is the messiah the old testament hints it every single bit
Jesus is the I Am
Yah of Israel is the I Am. The True God of all creation, who kills and makes alive, there's no other god but the Yah of creation. Yah said to keep His commandments, Jc says to keep his commandments, jc says to follow him, Yah says to follow no one but Him only. Yah said to keep the sabbath holy, He says to not go outside your dwelling place. Jc said its good to do good on the sabbath, he told the cripple, to take up his bed and go. God said to not carry any burden on the sabbath.
Obey only the Most High God alone.
the Word Bible means
,B= BASIC
I= INSTRUCTION
B= BEFORE
L= LEAVING
E= EARTH
B = Binary
I = Information
B = Boolean
artificia = L
intelligenc = E
Don't forget, Moses told you to part the Re(a)d Sea (c = 3)...
Notice how many of the names of Gods, etc have many A/E/I/L letters in them! Coincidence?
All that said the books in OT without apocrypha are same.
Then the gospels we read Jesus saying all has to be fulfilled as written in the Law,psalms and prophets.
Clear indication that this is the prophesied about him.
Then here Muslims get a problem because Quran mentions Law,psalms, gospel but omits prophets though in information mentions some persons in writings.
Omission of mention of Prophetic books not mention their names results in biggest cause if difference in bible and quran
How does all this affect Christianity and the "second coming of Christ"
It doesn't!
The Roman Empires JC isn't coming to Rapture anyone..
-_-
They're basically the same thing.
When was it made after Christianity?
They changed some pasages
That sounds great. none the less am comfortable with my original King James version .
This message is no different to Muslims ! You have to read in the Hebrew. They say you have read in the Arabic. Sorry, I speak neither.
Glad to see, as a Protestant Christian my scripture is not that dissimilar to your original.
What? It is very different than Muslims... Just ask any ex Muslims who speak Arabic...
The Christian Bible have countless of mistranslations from the Hebrew/Jewish Bible...
That is NOT what Rabbi God is Singer says on CZcams. The only difference between the Protestant Christian bible and the Jewish Tanach is the order of the books. We have the same books with the same verses, with the same words, but we place the book of Ruth between Judges and 1 Samuel and the book of Malachi at the end. But if you name a book, and verse, I can quote word for word what you have. The Catholic Bible adds the seven books of the Apocrypha. Protestant Christianity does not recognise these as scripture and nor does Judiasm. Indeed as a protestant Christian, I would go as far as saying, I do not consider Catholicism a form of Christianity because of their heretic doctrine and practices.
Tovia Singer ! Fing autocorrect !
I don't know why he refers to the "christian old testament" The modern translations we "christians" use mostly utilize the Masoretic text which has nothing to do with us as christians per se.Done by the Masorites between about 400-600a.d. they were Jewish scribes making a Jewish rendering of the jewish scriptures
Christians took the Masoretic text and mistranslated it somewhat for their own theological ends e.g. placing the word "virgin" (that would be "Betula" in the Hebrew original) instead of the term "young woman" or such (which is " `Alma" in the Hebrew original). Anyone denying this is lying.
And the Masoretes worked more like between 750 AD to 950 AD.
Thanks for watching Stephen. Yes, there are significant overlaps between the Tanakh and the OT, especially after the Protestant Reformation. I call it the "Christian Old Testament" because Jews, for the most part, do not have Old Testaments, they have Tanakhs. The "Old Testament" is a Christian name. I hope this helps.
@@ZviJ1 the word can have both meanings and context determines definition and since we take scripture in its entirety it is clear from the New Testament what the word and context would be there.That is the substance of your "criticism"? You want to highlight "disengenuous" I'll give you an example..Old Testament prophecies(An entire chapter in Isaiah for instance,and you are alluding to it) was firmly viewed by Rabbinical commentators as Messianic for centuries UNTIL Messiah actually came and then because HIS arrival,life,death,and resurrection fulfilled these prophecies and could not explained away suddenly the "meaning" went from Messianic to rather refering to Israel itself,et.al....in closing,your statements are skewed.Jewish translators doing the Septuagint 300 years BDFORE CHRIST translated that verse as "virgin"..as I stated,the word CAN and does have the bona fide ability to be "virgin",there are other places in the O.T. where it is translated "virgin" by jews themselves besides the septuagint.
CZcams-stephen sage: Defending the Faith
@@BiblicalCulture let's meet in the middle.It's an english name given to the Jewish scriptures,whether Christians use it doesn't make it the "christian old testament" ..there are non-christian religions that use it,cults that use it,etc..I am not sure what you mean by "overlaps"...the major "difference" I am aware of and I welcome your comment is the way books/writings are grouped and if not mistaken did not the jews themselves have a part in that themselves over the centuries?
@@ZviJ1 I stated they began their work between 400-600a.d.and I am exactly correct.Authorities concur amongst themselves it was from late 5th century through the 10th century.And please,don't say the "original" text.No one has the "original" (s)
Hear what he said, it is new 1500's. Never listen to Gentiles.
The oldest known written term תנ"ך is from 1500. The books themselves were finally compiled around the year 400 bce
It is the Old Testament. Don't lead people astray and don't manipulate the terminology just to get views.
Hebrew Bible = Old Testament = TaNaKh.
But the point is, for Jews it isn't "old" and can't be "old", bc it is the entirely of G-d's revelations. The usage of this word implies Christian beliefs, which obviously Jews don't agree with
@@robertrecchia2642 Right, but for the Jews the Bible does NOT end there. You yourself mentioned that there's a growing community of the Messianic Jews in Israel and around the world, and we read the Sefer Ha-Britot (ספר הבריתות), which is basically the complete Bible in Hebrew and includes both the Tanakh and the New Testament in Hebrew (HaBrit HaKhadasha הברית החדשה)
@@robertrecchia2642 Jesus did not Fulfill 💩. Your Edomite 🙎🏼♂️forefathers couldn't handle the prophecy about their ending 🔥,so they had to create their own savior. (Daniel 12:4)
“But thou, O Daniel, SHUT UP THE WORDS, and SEAL THE BOOK, EVEN to the Time OF THE END: MANY shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.” (Isaiah 43:11 ) I, even I, am the Lord; and BESiDE me there is NO saviour. 🎯 Now that's wisdom/understanding.
Old Testament is a corrupt version of Tanakh
Old Testament is "chritianese" for the Tanach, because they added upon it the "new" version, which is unnecessary tacking, thank you very much...
The Greek Tanakh is based on the Hebrew Tanakh translated by Jews for Jews who spoke Greek. I'm pretty sure they did a good on the translation because they all teach the same law.
There are numerous places where the LXX translation is barely recognizable compared to the Hebrew...Daniel, for instance.
@@KravMagoo
The authentic Septuagint, was only the first five books.
The original version of Septuagint, is no longer extant.
@@element2138 I'm not sure why you used the word "authentic". It's a translation...it exists...it's what we have. It's what the people mentioned in the Greek Scriptures used in most cases where they quoted Tanakh.
@@KravMagoo
We don't have the authentic Septuagint. It's no longer extant.
There were scholars who did their best to reverse engineer the Septuagint. That's what you get when you purchase a Septuagint.
If you read the introduction of one, you'll see.
Very confusing
Its Torah Nebem Ketawbem aka Tanak.
It bothers you, that the video presentation doesn't mispronounce it?
@@element2138 there's no h at the end it's just tanak תנכ
@@element2138 i can say that cuz I do know Hebrew. And I speak it along with Arabic and Aramaic
@@element2138 I speak English and generally Semitic.
@@element2138 no offense but you put yourself in as a dunce.
BCE????? AD ANNO DOMINI my friend
Shalom! It doesn't matter where Malachi is positioned in the Scriptures, like Isaiah, Moshe, and every Prophet of HA SHEM, they all knew who ultimately came, who is coming again, and who is everlasting to everlasting
, YESHUA HAMASHIACH. Your teachings are very rich and informative. Thank you for sharing.
When Talmud made in history compared to Christ?
Jesus and his disciples were followers of the Talmud. There are episodes and discussions about him, which make no sense otherwise (Like where Jesus spoke about curing and saving a life on Sabbath).
The Talmud in its final form, was canonized later.
@@element2138 it's said to be changed latter too. Which makes sense they did change it. The Tanakh is different n not Talmud
Old Testament is a corrupt version of Tanakh
Christians, at least since the reformation in the 16th century, have used the Hebrew Old Testament.