judaism.is - Having no complete Hebrew Bible at the time of Jesus, AFTER Christ and the destruction of Jerusalem, a “Hebrew Bible” was fabricated. The fraud included the man-made “laws” of the rabbis, mistranslations intended to de-throne Jesus, and was altered as late as the 10th century AFTER Chri…
Hebrew Bible, altering the Word of God, a crime of biblical proportion Judaism Select LanguageAfrikaansAlbanianAmharicArabicArmenianAssameseAymaraAzerbaijaniBambaraBasqueBelarusianBengaliBhojpuriBosnianBulgarianCatalanCebuanoChichewaChinese (Simplified)Chinese (Traditional)CorsicanCroatianCzechDanishDhivehiDogriDutchEsperantoEstonianEweFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrisianGalicianGeorgianGermanGreekGuaraniGujaratiHaitian CreoleHausaHawaiianHebrewHindiHmongHungarianIcelandicIgboIlocanoIndonesianIrishItalianJapaneseJavaneseKannadaKazakhKhmerKinyarwandaKonkaniKoreanKrioKurdish (Kurmanji)Kurdish (Sorani)KyrgyzLaoLatinLatvianLingalaLithuanianLugandaLuxembourgishMacedonianMaithiliMalagasyMalayMalayalamMalteseMaoriMarathiMeiteilon (Manipuri)MizoMongolianMyanmar (Burmese)NepaliNorwegianOdia (Oriya)OromoPashtoPersianPolishPortuguesePunjabiQuechuaRomanianRussianSamoanSanskritScots GaelicSepediSerbianSesothoShonaSindhiSinhalaSlovakSlovenianSomaliSpanishSundaneseSwahiliSwedishTajikTamilTatarTeluguThaiTigrinyaTsongaTurkishTurkmenTwiUkrainianUrduUyghurUzbekVietnameseWelshXhosaYiddishYorubaZulu Powered by Translate Home donations Antisemitism expulsions necessity of antisemitism Torah Jesus in the Talmud the Holy Trinity forgiveness Covenants the Church on the Jews Mystery of the Jewish People Who is human? abortion Jews and Blacks Perpetrators Goy Guide to World History How they do it disarming goyim Chabad the lobby banksters Rothschilds Swindlers list assassins hate pimps Epstein Mossad Jew media metastases kosher internet aftermath shapeshifters marranos donmeh kosher racket Muslims burning churches goy accomplices Catholic action Genocide World Wars Ritual Murder Israelis target children organ harvesting 1948 Big Lies Torah encourages lies Jesus was a Jew Hebrew Bible Kol Nidre Noahide deceit synagogue and state holocaust Nuremberg Judeo-Christian the Romans did it land without a people save any life false flags name calling high IQ Perversion pedophilia and sodomy Torah on women Torah on trannies potty voyeurs sicko sages Paganism kabbalah transmigration Resources documentaries ethical vaccines sacred art memes funny videos cosmology theological certainty levels of sin dispositions for a good death fallacies archive raw data Usury Pharisees Mary marks of the Church sola scriptura once saved private interpretation do this idols purgatory Christian Zionism call no man father asleep Sunday worship Inquisition phony victims Christmas slavery blushing Marxists New Order of Pharisees Jorge Opus Dei dishonorable mentions News jew flu SSPX third temple Putin Trump Kushner get the memo Soros self-reflection China Japan Italy France Iceland Hungary Poland Ireland Britain Antarctica two Lucys search big lies • Judaism’s hermeneutic of deceit • Hebrew “Bible” altering the holy word of God—a crime of biblical proportion first the Jews, then the Protestants The deceivers so hate Jesus that they have re-written the Bible and, because their tampered fraud is in Hebrew, they have gulled many. Masorete Jews altered the Old Testament for a millennium after the Crucifixion in order to dethrone Jesus Christ in their tampered Hebrew fraud. At the time of Jesus Christ’s Incarnation, there was no complete Hebrew Bible. Ironically the only complete Bible (Old Testament) for the Israelites at the time of Jesus was the Greek Septuagint, a Greek translation authorized and compiled in about 250 B.C. by the 72 rabbis of the Sanhedrin, the official Jewish court. After Christ and the destruction of Jerusalem, a “Hebrew Bible” was compiled to de-throne Jesus Christ. “The compiler Akiba ben Yosef (aka Rabbi Akiva) drew up the canon which would became the Tanakh in A.D. 95. He believed that the messiah wasn’t Jesus the Christ but a man named Bar Kochba. In his Torah he included the rabbi-created Halakahic laws and set out to destroy the credibility of the Gospels. This text ultimately became the Hebrew Bible or Masoretic Text when it was codified by Aaron Ben Asher in the A.D. 10th century and was latter given the stamp of sacred authorization by none other than the anti-Catholic, Maimonides!” https://callmejorgebergoglio.blogspot.com/2019/01/fresh-off-drukn-bible-of-friendship.html As late as 1000 A.D., the Masoretes, Jewish enemies of Jesus, altered their phony “Hebrew Bible” to reflect Judaism’s hatred of Jesus Christ. Need proof? The Dead Sea Scrolls agree with the Septuagint confirming that the “Hebrew Bible” was changed by the rabbis to reflect their hatred of Jesus Christ, His Church, and the New Israel, Christians. The rabbis altered the Word of God to dethrone Jesus, dispute His Virgin Birth, etc. Ironic isn’t it that the Greek is authentic while the Hebrew is not? It is a clever and diabolical trick of the rabbis to pretend otherwise. For the Old Testament, rely on the Septuagint. For an English version, rely on the Douay Rheims, as we do here. Four lines of evidence confirm that the Septuagint is authentic and the Masoretic “Hebrew Bible” is a post-Christian fraud: The authenticity of the Septuagint, authorized and translated by the Sanhedrin about 250 B.C. The Dead Sea scrolls corroborate the Septuagint translation and contradict the “Hebrew Bible.” The New Testament quotes from the Old Testament agree with the Septuagint and contradict the “Hebrew Bible.” The Syriac Peshitta Bible from the 2nd century A.D. agrees with the Septuagint and contradicts the “Hebrew Bible.” The New Testament quotes the Septuagint, not the Masoretic “Hebrew Bible.” The early Church accepted the Septuagint texts as authentic. The Guns, Lies, and Forgeries article below is compiled by a non-Catholic (Greek Orthodox), but it is a well-written and succinct summary of the problems with the Masoretic texts and the extreme measures that the Israelis have taken to prevent access to the Dead Sea Scrolls because the Dead Sea Scrolls contradict the Masoretic texts in hundreds of verses. See: Guns, Lies, and Forgeries by Robert E. Reis www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2010/02/septuagint-vs-masoretic-which-is-more.html download an interlinear Greek-English Septuagint here When God Spoke Greek—A Review by Michael A. Hoffman download here the classic example • Isaias 7:14 The Masoretes changed “virgin” (παρθένος parthenos in the authoritative Greek Septuagint and בְּתוּלָה bethulah in the Dead Sea Scrolls) to “young woman” or “damsel” (הָעַלְמָה, ha-almah in the Masoretes’ fraudulent “Hebrew Bible”). In the same passage, the Masoretes made other changes as well. Not only the Greek Septuagint, but also the Dead Sea Scrolls reveal the Masoretic Text as a fraud. Isaias 7:14 fragment of the Great Isaiah Scroll, the complete “Q” of the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumram The above passage from the Dead Sea Scrolls has a few differences from the Masoretic text (as used today in all Hebrew Bibles and which most translations are based on). In the top line the word יהוה (YHWH, Yahweh) is underlined, this is the name of God, the tetragrammaton. In the Masoretic text the word אדוני (adonai) is used instead. In the bottom line, near the middle is the word וקרא (v'qara) meaning “he will call.” In the Masoretic text this word is written as וקראת (v'qarat) meaning “she will call.” On the bottom line near the left end is the word עמנואל (imanuel). This word is the combination of two words - עמנו אל (imanu and el). Because these two words are grouped together as one we know that it is a name. In the Masoretic text this name is written as two separate words - עמנו אל (imanu el). another example • Zacharias 9:9 “That all may be fulfilled” (John 19:28, Matthew 5:18). Jesus rode a donkey, a first-riden colt into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday (Matthew 21:5): “Tell ye the daughter of Sion: Behold thy king cometh to thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of her that is used to the yoke.” This was foretold in Zacharias 9:9: Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Sion, shout for joy, O daughter of Jerusalem: Behold thy King will come to thee, the just and saviour: he is poor, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass. Zacharias 9:9 The authentic Septuagint identifies the King entering Jerusalem as the one who is “delivering” [salvation], the King is the Savior: https://archive.org/details/InterlinearGreekEnglishSeptuagintOldTestamentPrint/page/n3113/mode/2up The verse is fluently translated by the Douay-Rheims into English: https://judaism.is/assets/douay-rheims-1610-bible.pdf The Masoretes bowdlerized the verse saying the King entered Jerusalem on an ass merely “having” salvation, not the Savior, but one saved. https://biblehub.com/interlinear/zechariah/9.htm The Protestant homosexual King James version parrots the fraudulent Masoretic Text: Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass. https://biblehub.com/kjv/zechariah/9.htm the Latin Vulgate “The ancient texts which Jerome consulted for his translation are no longer extant. The early Church Fathers held that these texts were more faithful to the original Scripture autographs than any manuscript that survived Jerome, thus rendering Jerome’s Vulgate and the Douay Rheims’ translation of it, the surviving pristine fountain of Bible accuracy.” Bible Wars • The Conspiracy Against the Douay Rheims Vulgate and the Geneva Apocrypha by Michael Hoffman Revisionist History Newsletter, Number 38, November 2005 https://revisionisthistorystore.blogspot.com/2010/03/michael-hoffmans-online-revisionist.html excerpt (note especially the Protestant endorsements of both St. Jerome’s Latin Vulgate and the original Douay-Rheims): The Bible in English begins with the Bible in Latin, specifically the “Vulgate” (“common”) Bible of the western Church, translated by St. Jerome, circa 405 AD. Erasmus’ reputation as Bible scholarship’s humanist outlaw was based on his daring attempt to supplant the Vulgate with a new Latin translation, the Novum lnstrumentum, of 1516, based in tum on supposed authenticated Greek texts. In 1408 an Oxford statute, first directed against Lollardy, and then Lutheranism, required episcopal approval for publication of any English translation. William Tyndale would quickly run afoul of it. “Luther’s German translation appeared in 1522, Tyndale’s in 1525, and it was inevitable that contemporaries should regard the latter as an English rendering of the former.” (J. Isaacs, “The Sixteenth Century English Versions” in The Bible in Its Ancient and English Versions, Henry Wheeler Robinson, ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1940). According to Isaacs: Tyndale adopts Luther’s order of the books, takes over a substantial part of his prefaces and prologues, uses nearly all his margin references, errors included, adopts his paragraph division, and incorporates a large number of his marginal comments and “certain prefaces, and other pestilent glosses in the margins” as Henry VIII wrote to Luther, “for the advancement and setting forth of his abominable heresies.” Tyndale’s translation is mainly based on the Greek of Erasmus (second edition of 1519 and the third of 1522),’ and Luther’s German. When, in 1529, the Vatican librarian Agostino Steuco furnished extensive arguments for the superiority of the Vulgate over the Greek texts, the friends of Erasmus must have had a good laugh at the expense of this “backward” prelate. But we now know that assaults on Erasmus’s edition were often well founded. A sound Greek text would not be established until the nineteenth century. The guarantor of the gospels throughout the majority of the existence of the Church had been the Vulgate, not defective Greek texts which Tyndale relied upon in “translating directly from the Greek.”… Tyndale was responsible for a singular advancement in Bible translation: he bucked the rabbinic superstition against the printing and pronunciation of God’s personal name, YHVH (Yahweh), with the introduction of Jehovah into his English version. The Oxford English Dictionary: “1530 edition of Tyndale’s Exodus 6:3: ‘I appeared unto Abraham, Isaac and Jacob an almighty God: but in my name Jehovah’ (Wyclif and Jerome’s Vulgate have: ‘Adonay; Adonai’). The rabbinic Masoretes gave as a direction to the translator to substitute Adonai for the ‘ineffable name,’ which is actually done by Jerome in the Vulgate translation of Exodus 6:3 and hence by Wycliff. Tyndale, was ... the first to use it (Jehovah) in English (Peter Galatinus had used it in Latin in 1516).” Tyndale was responsible for a singular advancement in Bible translation: he bucked the rabbinic superstition against the printing and pronunciation of God’s personal name, YHVH (Yahweh), with the introduction of Jehovah into his English version. The Oxford English Dictionary: “1530 edition of Tyndale’s Exodus 6:3: ‘I appeared unto Abraham, Isaac and Jacob an almighty God: but in my name Jehovah’ (Wyclif and Jerome’s Vulgate have: ‘Adonay; Adonai’). The rabbinic Masoretes gave as a direction to the translator to substitute Adonai for the ‘ineffable name,’ which is actually done by Jerome in the Vulgate translation of Exodus 6:3 and hence by Wycliff. Tyndale, was ... the first to use it (Jehovah) in English (Peter Galatinus had used it in Latin in 1516).” Beginning in 1526 copies of the Tyndale Bible were smuggled into England from the Continent chiefly by Antwerp merchants, and sold secretly by the private enterprise of such men as Robert Barnes and Simon Fish of Gray’s Inn. These dealers in a contraband book were known as ‘New Testamenters.” In response, a book-banning decree to the bishops of England was issued by Cuthberth Tunstall, Archbishop of London, in 1526. Tyndale attempted to put a brave face on the ban and the subsequent burning of his New Testament in his native land, being more alert than the Catholic authorities, as the Protestant party almost always was in these cases, to public relations and world opinion: “I am glad, for these two benefits shall come thereof: ‘I shall get money to bring myself out of debt, and the whole world will cry out against the burning of God’s word ... “ But was it simply a matter of the suppression of the pure word of God? Who was Archbishop Tunstall? Shall we be satisfied to characterize him simply as a blockheaded, bookburning bigot who suppressed Tyndale because he feared that the truth of the Gospel would get into the hands of the peasantry? “It has long been the fashion to speak of Tunstall as a bitter opponent of vernacular versions because he declined to further Tyndale’s project for an English version of the Bible ... and because he burnt copies of the latter’s New Testament, which he ... felt did not faithfully represent the original... It is well to remember that Tunstall was a finished Greek scholar, the friend and patron of Erasmus, and perfectly competent to assess Tyndale’s version at its true value. Even the Protestant historian Burnet terms Tunstall, ‘the last and most eminent of all the Popish clergy’… lt was not ... the fact of a translation being made accessible to the people that provoked Tyndale’s condemnation ... As Canon Dixon says (in History of the Church of England, vol. 1, p. 451): ‘If the clergy had acted thus, simply because they would have kept the people ignorant of the word of God, they would have been without excuse. But it was not so. Every one of the little volumes containing portions of the Sacred Text that was issued by Tyndale, contained also a prologue and notes, written with such a hot fury of vituperation against the prelates and clergy, the monks and friars, the rites and ceremonies of the Church as ... was hardly likely to commend it to the favor of those who were attacked.” (Hugh Pope, English Versions of the Bible. (St. Louis, Herder, 1952), pp. 148-149. (Emphasis supplied). “There is no proof that churchmen of those days were as a body opposed to having the Bible circulated in English. Nor is there any truth in the widespread notion that Tyndale’s version provided an eye opener to the people of England ... that ‘the contrast between Christianity as disclosed in the sacred literature, and the version of Christianity which the Medieval Church presented was so extreme that not even the simplest reader could fail to see it.” (Pope 149). Catholic Biblical scholarship had been far from moribund in the sixteenth century. The first new Latin Bible (Lyon, 1527-28) was translated by the Dominican Sante Pagnini under papal patronage. Pagnini’s Old Testament “was universally recognized as the product of impressive Hebrew scholarship .. .it was reprinted and revised throughout the century ... the first critical edition of the Vulgate, produced by Bernardino Gadolo, a Camaldolese monk ... was published in 1495 ... .in 1547 Johannes Hentenius (a Dominican) published a version (of the Vulgate) ... His text was reprinted at Antwerp by Plantijn publishers ... and was accepted by the faculty of theology at the University of Louvain.” (Oxford Encylopedia of the Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 162, 164). The blunder of the Catholic hierarchy of Henrician England was that instead of issuing a better and more accurate New Testament in English, they endeavored to suppress the only entrant in the field. It would not be until 1582 that a Catholic New Testament would be issued but not by the well-heeled hierarchy of the Catholic Church; rather by nearly destitute Elizabethan exiles, among them the cream of Oxford scholars, who found refuge from Elizabeth’s hounds in France, at a place called Rhemes (a.k.a. “Rheims”). The Conspiracy Against Douay Rheims In Tudor England, both sides of the religious controversy regarded the other’s Bible as foul heresy. The stakes were enormous and emotions at fever-pitch. On February 7 1587 the eve of the judicial assassination of a queen, with only hours to go before she was to forfeit her head, a disagreement erupted over whose Bible version was the trustworthy one, a dispute mconce1vable to twenty-first century minds: “Dr. Eadie on the authority of La Mort de la Reyne d’Escosse, Douairere de France, reprinted in Jebb’s Collection ii, p. 616, related that Mary Queen of Scots on the evening before her execution in Fotheringay Castle, ‘laying her hand solemnly on a copy of the Rheims New Testament took an oath of innocence, and that the Earl of Kent interposing that as the book on which she had sworn was false, her oath was of no _value, to which she promptly answered: ‘Does your lordship suppose that my oath would be better, if I swore on your translation in which I do not believe?” (Jacob I. Mombert, English Versions of the Bible: A Handbook [London: Samuel Bagster, 1883], pp. 317-318. How the Word of God was translated and annotated was a matter of state security in the Elizabethan Age. A cartoonish distillation of the issues at stake, consisting of half-truths, was prepared by the British Secret Service. This “press release” was composed in its essentials in the 1560, but it was parroted as recently as 2005 by the noted Calvinist scholar R.C. Sproul: “During the reign of Mary Tudor (1553-1558) the Reformation was suppressed. The Roman Catholic mass had to be celebrated, services could not be conducted in English ... persecutions drove exiles from Britain to Europe. The most capable scholars among them came to Geneva, Switzerland. There they undertook the task of preparing a new translation of th… truncated (42,011 more characters in archive)