All old documents (Old Testament) before Masoretic text are exceedingly support the truth of Masoretic text bible. This becomes a strong proof that Masoretic text bible until this time can be believed wholy.
ACCURACY OF THE MASORETIC TEXT BIBLE
INTRODUCTION
When a paper
has been written using one language (example: English) then the paper is
translated into another language and if there is a difference, the original
written work is the correct reference while the translation contains errors. Similar
to the bibles that have been written in ancient hebrew and then translated into
various languages in the world, when there is a difference between the
ancient hebrew bible and its translation, the ancient hebrew bible becomes the
correct reference while the translation contain mistakes. However, the ancient hebrew
bible has been copied for thousand years from one generation to the next generation
by hand [knowing that human beings tend to err] and all the original writings which
have been directly written by prophets have perished. This event causes some
people today doubt the accuracy of the hebrew bible. In fact, often biblical
translations of various publishers contain interpretation.
MASORETIC TEXT
AT A GLANCE
In
the Jewish culture, not everyone may copy the Tanakh (abbreviation
of
Torah, Nevi'im, UKetuvimwhich means the
Torah, the prophets, and the writings; Tanakh is the term for 24 old testament
books (OT) in hebrew bible) scrolls. Only
very well trained people (soferim
(Scribes)) may copy the Tanakh scrolls. They
have been trained since very young and through very disciplined
education continued from one generation to the next generation until today. Every
one roll which has been copied to finish must go through the testing stage before the
roll is read in a synagogue, and if there is one error in the scroll it will be
canceled wholly. In the Jewish tradition, there is no difference even though one
letter between one scroll with another scrolls. When the second temple was collapsed by
the Roman empire (70 CE) the Jews spread throughout the world (second exile). The
Jews continued to copy the Tanakh documents (hand-copied); copied by soferim,
in different countries. Each soferim
do not know another soferim. The Tanakh copied
from one generation to the next generation. It is proven to this day that the
soferim's copies are very accurate and almost perfect, very nearly no
difference even one letter. Is there any work of man
who can match compare to the soferim? When the independence of the state of
Israel occurred in 1948 the Jews returned to their homeland from various
countries in the world; copies of Tanakh documents collected and proved that
sofers has been copied very accurately (very nearly no one letter different/almost
perfect). Although the hebrew Biblical (Tanakh) today is copied by printing
presses in various countries in the world, for the Jews the scrolls of Tanakh
copied by the soferim using the hands have higher authority than the biblical
(Tanakh) which have been copied using the printing press in various countries
in the world. The author never gets any report/evidence from any Jew who claimed that the Hebrew Bible including Masoretic
text
today is fallible or missing a part.
The
Hebrew text only has consonants and has no vowel. The Hebrew Bible (Old
Testament) is written in ancient Hebrew which is not currently used as a
colloquial language. One word in ancient Hebrew written form can have several meanings. As an example: ‘שלם’ can be read ‘shalam’ which
means peace, can also be read ‘shillem’
means recompense. This causes the Jewish scholars to add vowels (without changing any consonant) in the hebrew Tanakh according
to the Jewish oral law to evade a difference in
reading; the text which contains added
vowel marks is called ‘Masoretic text’. The Hebrew Bible is written in ancient Hebrew letters, while the
present Hebrew bible (including the Masoretic text)
is written in modern Hebrew letters that are very different in form than the
ancient Hebrew letters. Nevertheless, no meaning has changed; every letter in
Hebrew is a pictograph and has meaning, but it never changes meaning. For
example: in ancient Hebrew, the gimel
letter (ג) is a pictograph
of the feet while in modern Hebrew the pictograph of the camel both retain the
same meaning of ‘weightlifting’.
There are many old scrolls that have been found, one the oldest called "Samaritan Pentateuch" (around 400 BC). We can read the story of the kingdom of
Solomon which was divided in the book of 1 kings and 2 chronicles, 10 tribes in
the north which was called Israel and the two tribes in the south was called
Judah. The kingdom of Judah in the south is more faithful to the LORD, in
contrast to the 10 tribes in the north (Israel) who received only 5 books of
Moses (the book of Genesis til the book of Deuteronomy). The 5 books of Moses which
were used by the 10 tribes in the north (called the Samaritan Pentateuch) is very nearly the same in meaning with Masoretic text bible and
contain additional
words when compared to the 5 books used by the
two tribes in the south.
In the other side, the Qumran scrolls in the area around
the Dead Sea, although about 1000 years older than the Masoretic bible Text, were allegedly copied by the essents (not
by soferim). The author has read/examine the Qumran scrolls through the photograph in
www.deadseascrolls.org.il. In meaning the Qumran scrolls give almost the
same result with Masoretic text bible. But when compared to letter by letter there
are many differences between Masoretic text
bible and Dead sea
scrolls. By comparing the same verses on different scrolls in Qumran there are
different letters or maybe also word. It appears that the Qumran scrolls are
inconsistent, in contrast to the Masoretic text
bible which is very consistent. If
you choose Qumran scrolls as higher authority, which Qumran scroll would you
choose? This proves that older scrolls does not guarantee having better authority.
SEPTUAGINT PARALLELISM TO OTHER DOCUMENTS
The Septuagint is a bible
translation of the Old Testament to the Greek language around 280 BC, translated
by 72 Jewish elders by the order of Ptolemy II Philadelphus; 6 from every tribe
of Israel. Compared to the hebrew bible text, the translation of the Old
Testament manuscript of the Septuagint contained many differences. So Origen, one of church father about 300 AD corrected the Septuagint translation differences
and till today the Septuagint translation used by Christians is the Septuagint which has been corrected by Origen. You can learn more about the
Septuagint at www.britannica.com/topic/septuagint. The Greek text, not the original Hebrew
text, became the primary basis for the ancient Latin, Coptic, Ethiopian,
Armenian, Georgian, Slavonic, and never ceased to be a standarised version of
the old testament documents in the Greek church. The Vulgate translation is translated from
the Septuagint and not from the Hebrew Bible.
Every
bible translation has error probabilities and contains interpretations. If so, does the current
Septuagint translation deserve to be preserved as
old testament document that has higher authority than Masoretic text bible? The author does not think so. But, some people
doubt whether today Masoretic text bible can still be believed completely. One of ways is to compare Masoretic text
bible (from any year) with the Qumran and Nahal
Hever scrolls (both are about 1000 older
than Masoretic text). As the result, The Qumran and Nahal Hever scrolls give the identic (almost
same) result with Masoretic text
bible. It proofs that Masoretic text bible can
be trusted completely, remembering that the Dead Sea scrolls are
inconsistent.
Some
examples which contain differences in old manuscripts
are presented
below:
1.
Genesis 4 : 8
Here is a
verse quote of Genesis 4 : 8 which is written in Masoretic
Bible Text:
וַיֹּאמֶר קַיִן אֶל־הֶבֶל אָחִיו וַֽיְהִי בִּהְיוֹתָם בַּשָּׂדֶה
וַיָּקָם קַיִן אֶל־הֶבֶל אָחִיו וַיַּהַרְגֵֽהוּ׃
Now Cain talked with Abel his brother; and it came
to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his
brother and killed him. (NKJV)
In Samaritan Pentateuch there are
additional words which is not present in Masoretic text. Below
is the words quote:
וַיאמר קין אל־הבל אחיו [נלכה השדה] ויהי בהיותם בשדה ויקם קין אל־הבל
אחיו ויהרגהו׃
The clause in
square brackets above (in blue) can be translated as: “let us go to the field”. If we insert it to the
NKJV translation above, we
will get this result: “Now Cain
talked with Abel his brother: “Let us go to the field”. And it came to pass,
when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and
killed him”. By comparing both quotes above, then we will get an
impression there is a missing clause in Masoretic text (in
blue square brackets). The clause in
blue square brackets at Samaritan Pentateuch quote above is not exist in Masoretic text
bible but it exist in Septuagint. But,
when comparing Masoretic text bible with Qumran
scroll (labeled as 4Q Genesisb) without refering to Septuagint and Samaritan Pentateuch,
it gives the same result (see figure 1). So, are Septuagint and Samaritan
Pentateuch prove the Masoretic text error? At final discussion, it will be
known why there were words additions in Samaritan Pentateuch.
Figure 1: Qumran scroll fragment photo labeled
4Q Genesisb M41.996. Scroll fragment contains verse in book of Genesis 4 : 2 – 11. The yellow underlined clause: ל הבל
אחיו ויהי בהיותם בשד
without additional נלכה השדה in verse of Genesis 4 : 8.
Figure 2: Isaiah scroll photo containing verse Isaiah 7 : 14, labeled 1Q
Isaiaha. The green underlined word is ‘almah’ word and is not ‘b’thulah’ word.
2.
Isaiah 7 : 14
In Masoretic text
bible, it was recorded עלמה word (read: almah; means ‘young woman’, maiden or newly
married girl) in book of Isaiah 7 : 14 (see
figure 2), whereas in Septuagint translation, it was recorded παρθένος (read: parthenos; means ‘virgin’). This
seems to conflict with book of Matthew 1 : 23 and Luke 1 : 27 because in
Matthew and Luke it was recorded as parthenos means ‘virgin’. But in fact, in the Qumran scroll
(labeled 1Q Isaiaha) it was also recorded as ‘almah’ word, the same with
Masoretic text and did not use hebrew word בתולה (read: b’thulah; mean ‘virgin’).
We can find in hebrew bible (including Masoretic text),
actually the almah word in hebrew can mean ‘virgin’. In
Genesis 24 : 14 it was recorded
that Rebecah is a almah but in the book of Genesis 24 : 16 it was recorded
that Rebecah is a b’thulah. Old testament documents has been written in
ancient hebrew language and new testament documents has been written in greek
language. There are cultural differences between hebrew and greek. Not all word
in hebrew language has an English equivalent as well as hebrew
and greek language. Now we can see that although in
hebrew bible (include Masoretic text) it was recorded as almah word in Isaiah
7 : 14, it does not give proves that Masoretic text
has changed. Almah word in Masoretic text is also not
conflicting with new testament documents (Matthew and Luke).
Figure 3: Psalms 22 : 16/17 verse fragment photo in Nahal Hever labeled
5/6 HevPsalms. The green underlined word is כארו and is not כארי.
3. Psalms 22 : 16/17
For christians,
this verse refers to the crucifixion of Jesus Christ prophecy, but when we read
in hebrew bible will find something very different. Below is a quote of Psalms
22 : 16/17 in Masoretic text bible:
כִּי סְבָבוּנִי כְּלָבִים עֲדַת מְרֵעִים הִקִּיפוּנִי כָּאֲרִי
יָדַי וְרַגְלָֽי׃
For dogs have
encompassed me, a company of evil-doers have inclosed me; like a lion, they are
at my hands and my feet.
(translated by Varda-Books)
(translated by Varda-Books)
The word translated by Christian as ‘pierce’ in Psalms 22: 16/17 is translated from the word כארי (read: kaari, meaning ‘like a lion’). If it was observed grammatically in Masoretic text, the kaari word is followed by the phrase: ורגלי ידי (read: yaday w'raglay means ‘my hands and my feet’). It may seem rather odd because the noun is followed by noun, unlike the Christian translations in which the verb ‘pierce’ followed by nouns (my hands and my feet). Christians use many old translation documents of old testament (examples: Septuagint, Vulgate, Syriac, etc.), all the translate as piercing.
Other evidence was
found in the area around Qumran in Nahal Hever which is about 1000 years older
than Masoretic text and was labeled 5/6 HevPsalms. The
consonants was recorded as כארו (read: kaaru) and was not כארי. There is only a slight difference between the letter י and ו after the letters כאר, because the copying by hand so some people assume that Masoretic
text is
corrupt between consonants י and ו. A readable clause on 5/6 HevPsalms
fragment is: הקיפוני כארו ידיה (read: hiqqifuni kaaru yadeha) means ‘they smite me, [pierce]? her hand’. In ancient Hebrew it is strongly suspected that the word כארו does not have any
meaning (LOL!), but some Christians think כארו word
means piercing (can be proven by examining the ancient Hebrew dictionaries of
Jewish and Christian publications).
Based on book ‘Variae Lectiones
Veteris Testamenti’ which was written by De-Rossi that in Masoretic text
bible it was ever read as כארו (kaaru), while on the margin was כארי (kaari).
According to his writting it was related with Deuteronomy 24 : 9. De-Rossi also
read on Masorah Magna (the marginal note on Masoretic text): כארי ידי ורגלי כארו כתיב which means כארי (kaari) my hands and feet, כארו (kaaru) ketiv [=textual reading]. R.
Jacobus Chaiim which was estimated as Jew ever wrote: וקרי כארי במקצה ספרים מדרקים מצאתי
כתוב כארו which means at the end
of some books exactly I find כארו (kaaru), and was read as כארי (kaari). His intention is: it was
ever found that in some Masoretic text bible it was written as כארו (kaaru)
but was read as כארי (kaari). But it was unfortunate why it was not explained
which Masoretic text bible in which כארו (kaaru)
word was there as a textual reading. So it was implied by De-Rossi that kaaru
and kaari both are true.
In all jewish
literatures (including Masoretic texts), in Psalms 22
: 16/17 it is always recorded as ‘like a lion’. One example is Targum of the Psalms which has
been written before Masoretic text it was written as ‘like
a lion’. Here is a quote of targum Psalms 22 : 16/17 and
its translation:
מְטוּל דְאַחֲזַרוּ עֲלָי רַשִׁיעֵי דִמְתִילִין לְכַלְבַיָא
סַגִיעִין כְּנִישַׁת מַבְאִישִׁין אַקְפוּנִי נָכְתִין הֵיךְ כְּאַרְיָא אַיְדַי
וְרִגְלָי:
Because the wicked have surrounded me, they are
like many dogs; a gathering of evildoers has hemmed me in, they bite like
a lion my hands and my feet.
The
word in Targum of the Psalms is: ‘like a lion’, is
sufficiently strong evidence that before Masoretic text era Psalms 22:
16/17 record the word ‘kaari/like a lion’. If
King David who wrote the book of Psalms 22: 16/17 simply wrote the word ‘pierce’
without a word ‘like a lion’, why there is word ‘kaari/like a lion’ in Targum
of the Psalms? The Jew until this day teach that the word ‘kaari/like a lion’ contains meaning ‘pierce’ in Psalms 22 : 16/17. One example: “Like [the prey of] a
lion are my hands and feet are as if mangled by a lion’s jaws” (by Rashi). In every bible
translation, it tends to be written interpretationally and not the litteral
meaning. Maybe this is what happens in Psalms 22 : 16/17.
Another
example is in the Pesikta Rabbati (פסיקתא רבתי)
chapter 35 -37 in Hebrew language. Because it will be too long discussion, then
the quotation will not be presented here. The point is, explained in the Pesikta
Rabbati that in the book of Psalms 22 it refer to the King Messiah prophecy who
would suffer, die, and give His soul for many people. The King Messiah was
surrounded by many wicked who are roaring like lions for prey.
All humans
today never know what king David actually wrote, whether ‘kaari’ or ‘kaaru’,
but each denomination claims that they are right
themselves. Perhaps the Christians is right that was
actually written by king David was ‘pierce’ and was not
‘kaari/like a lion’ but all
evidences are not
enough.
4.
Psalms 145
Psalms
145 contains David's praise to LORD; each verse begins with Hebrew letters in
the order of the Hebrew alphabet (א, ב, ג, ד, ...) but no verse begins with the letter 'nun' (נ) in Masoretic text
bible. In order to understand better, the followings are quotes of some verses
of Psalms 145 that begin one letter before 'nun' (נ)
i.e. the letter 'mem' (מ) up to four letters
after the letter 'nun' i.e. the letter 'tsadi' (צ):
מַֽלְכוּתְךָ
מַלְכוּת כָּל־עֹֽלָמִים וּמֶֽמְשֶׁלְתְּךָ בְּכָל־דֹּור וָדֹֽור׃13
Thy
kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and thy dominion endures through all
generations.
סֹומֵךְ
יהוה לְכָל־הַנֹּפְלִים וְזֹוקֵף לְכָל־הַכְּפוּפִֽים׃14
The
Lord supports all that are falling, and sets up all that are broken down.
עֵֽינֵי־כֹל
אֵלֶיךָ יְשַׂבֵּרוּ וְאַתָּה נֹֽותֵן־לָהֶם אֶת־אָכְלָם בְּעִתֹּֽו׃15
The
eyes of all wait upon thee; and thou givest them their food in due
season.
פֹּותֵחַ
אֶת־יָדֶךָ וּמַשְׂבִּיעַ לְכָל־חַי רָצֹֽון׃16
Thou
openest thine hands, and fillest every living thing with pleasure.
צַדִּיק
יהוה בְּכָל־דְּרָכָיו וְחָסִיד בְּכָל־מַעֲשָֽׂיו׃17
The
Lord is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works.
(translated
from Septuagint in English)
But
in fact, Qumran scrolls give a prove that there is a verse which was begun by
'nun' (see figure 4) so the verses above become:
The green text
is additional verse in Qumran scroll Psalms 145
|
מַֽלְכוּתְךָ
מַלְכוּת כָּל־עֹֽלָמִים וּמֶֽמְשֶׁלְתְּךָ בְּכָל־דֹּור וָדֹֽור׃13
Thy
kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and thy dominion endures through all
generations.
נאמן אלוהים בכל־דרכיו וחסיד
בכל־מעשיו׃
[The Lord is faithful in
his words, and holy in all his works.]
סֹומֵךְ
יהוה לְכָל־הַנֹּפְלִים וְזֹוקֵף לְכָל־הַכְּפוּפִֽים׃14
The
Lord supports all that are falling, and sets up all that are broken down.
The question is how the verse
(started by 'nun') was included on the Qumran scroll? Several chapters in the Psalms
i.e. chapter 25 and 34 also contain poems similar to Psalms 145, each verse
begins with Hebrew letters in the order of the Hebrew alphabet; in chapter 25 no
verse begins with the letters 'beth' (ב)
and 'waw' (ו) whereas in chapter 34 no verse begins by
the letter 'waw' (ו). The pattern that
appears in Psalms 25 and 34 can be a clue not to take quickly the decision that
there is a missing verse in Masoretic text. The Jewish
Talmud also gives an explanation why no verse was started by the letter 'nun'
in Psalms 145, following the quotation:
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Why is there no verse beginning with
the letter nun in ashrei? Because it contains an allusion to the downfall of
the enemies of Israel, a euphemism for Israel itself. As it is written: “The
virgin of Israel has fallen and she will rise no more; abandoned in her land,
none will raise her up” (Amos 5:2), which
begins with the letter nun. Due to this verse, ashrei does not include a verse
beginning with the letter nun. (Berachot 4b : 21)
Figure 4: Qumran scroll photo (labeled 11Q Psalmsa
M43.786) contain additional verse of Psalms 145 which started by letter 'nun'.
Jews have investigated the
additional verse in Qumran scroll Psalms 145, which was begun by the letter
'nun', because it gave the impression that something was missing from Masoretic
text. Psalms 145 contains praise to LORD (יהוה) which always contains
word LORD (no word Elohim was written). The verse in the Psalms 145 which was
begun by the letter 'nun' was the result of a copy of the Psalms 145 : 17 which was
begun by the word צדיק (read: tsadiq) and then
it was replaced by 'נאמן אלהים' (read: Ne'emen Elohim) which produced a verse that began with the
letter 'nun'. Another reason that this verse (started by nun) is odd is because
it includes the word Elohim (אלהים). Why? In the Hebrew mindset, the word Elohim (אלהים) has a different meaning
than the word LORD (יהוה). LORD in Tanakh means goodness/mercy of the Creator of the
universe, while in Tanakh if Elohim was written, it means Tanakh points to the
judgment of the Creator of the universe. As examples: The word Elohim in Exodus
7 : 1 states the judgment of the Creator of the universe to the pharaoh, and
the word LORD in Genesis 19 declares the mercy of the Creator of the universe
to Lot and the cities around Sodom and Gomorrah. Psalms 145 contains praise for
goodness/mercy and not because of the judgment of the Creator of the universe,
so the word Elohim in Psalms 145 gives the impression out of the topic. Another
clue is that every verse in Psalms 145 on Qumran scroll was always ended by the
sentence: ברוך יהוה וברוך
שמו לעולם ועד which means ‘Blessed
be YHWH and blessed be His name from forever until forever’. This sentence
did not exist in Septuagint and Masoretic text.
From the above
explanation, we can see the oddnes in the Psalms 145 which was started by the
letter 'nun', so the Jews knew that it was only a comment added by the essents;
Hebrew writings did not recognise any punctuation so that all seem flat. But
these such verses in square brackets in bible translations by christians was not
found in the Greek bible, while it is found in square brackets in some texts in
modern Tanakh.
More
Clues about The
Accuracy of Masoretic Text
The hebrew bible used by Jews and
Christians today is Masoretic text Bible.
There are very many Masoretic texts that were
hand-copied since medieval times to the present. The
oldest Masoretic text is the Aleppo Codex around 900 AD and the Leningrad Codex in
1008 AD. Masoretic text bible is very
consistent. From very
many medieval Masoretic texts that have
been discovered, there are very nearly no difference.
In contrast to other manuscripts older than Masoretic texts,
for example: The Qumran scrolls and the surrounding areas (Nahal Hever, Judean
desert). The
results of their copies are not uniform and there tends to be a difference
between one manuscript and another, one example: The Qumran scroll of Isaiah 2
: 7 give a prove that 1QIsaiaha and 4QIsaiahb record קץ but 4QIsaiaha record קצה. This could be a clue that earlier manuscripts do not guarantee
more true than the younger manuscripts. If Masoretic text bible has very
nearly no one difference from the very many Masoretic texts
bible copied by hand to this day it can be a clue to the present generation of
human beings that Hebrew Bible has not changed since the century BC.
Another way of knowing whether Masoretic
text bible is
still entirely trustworthy is to compare other ancient Jewish literatures
written before Masoretic text exists.
One
example is:
In Masoretic text bible of Deuteronomy
32 : 8, it was
recorded: “sons of Israel (בני ישראל)”:
When the Most High
divided their inheritance to the nations, When He separated the sons of Adam,
He set the boundaries of the peoples According to the number of the children of
Israel. (NKJV)
But
in Qumran fragment and Septuagint, it was
recorded: “sons of God (בני
אלוהים)”. Because Septuagint and Qumran fragment are the older
manuscripts, at a glance it can be decided that Masoretic text bible has
changed. But there are still some other proofs. In the Samaritan Pentateuch as
the oldest, it is recorded ‘sons of Israel’. Also in the
targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel (around 100 AD), it was
recorded ‘sons of Israel’. Below is a
quote from the book of Deuteronomy 32 : 8 in the
targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel in English translation:
When the Most High
made allotment of the world unto the nations which proceeded from the sons of
Noach, in the separation of the writings and languages of the children of men
at the time of the division, He cast the lot among the seventy angels, the
princes of the nations with whom is the revelation to oversee the city, even at
that time He established the limits of the nations according to the sum of the
number of the seventy souls of Israel who went down into Mizraim [=
Egypt].
The truth is man and angel is sons of God (see Genesis 6 : 4 and
Job 1 and 2). All humans today never know what Moses actually wrote: whether ‘sons
of Israel (בני ישראל)’ or ‘sons of God (בני
אלוהים)’. Actually
Qumran fragment and Septuagint do not
prove that Masoretic text bible is corrupt.
It has been discussed in this short paper that
there is actually no valid proof that can proove that Masoretic text bible is erroneous/changed.
All ancient jewish literatures beside bible are exceedingly support the truths
which were written in Masoretic text bible. Moreover, the author has read the
Samaritan Pentateuch (400 BCE) which came from the 10 tribes on the
North (was called Israel) and which was not influenced by the 2 tribes on the
south (was called Jehuda/Jew) exceedingly support the truth of Masoretic text bible. The Samaritan Pentateuch is very nearly the same to Masoretic text bible, word by word. There is only very few
difference which are meaningless between
Samaritan Pentateuch and Masoretic text bible. The other difference is the
Samaritan Pentateuch contains additional words which are not in Masoretic text
bible. However, the additions which are in Samaritan Pentateuch and are not
in Masoretic text bible is known by Jewish as Jewish oral law. Thus the differences between the Qumran scrolls
and Masoretic text bible is identic with Samaritan Pentateuch and Masoretic
text bible. Example: the difference between ‘sons of Israel’ [was recorded in
Samaritan Pentateuch, and Masoretic text bible]
and ‘sons of God’ [was recorded in Qumran fragment and Septuagint] in Deuteronomy 32 : 8
asserts that both are true. This kind of thing can also be applied to other
bible verses.
Conclusion:
All old documents (Old Testament) before Masoretic text are
exceedingly support the truth of Masoretic text bible. Every difference
in Masoretic text bible is meaningless. The results of Masoretic text bible and Samaritan
Pentateuch (400 BCE) are almost the same, only very few meaningless differences
and the other difference is that the Samaritan Pentateuch contains additional
words which are not in Masoretic text bible. This becomes a strong proof that Masoretic
text bible until this time can be believed wholy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)