Versions of the Torah

A major problem with the Tawrāh (Torah) is that there are many different versions of it that are used by Jews and Christians. Here are some examples of texts that contain different versions of the Torah. They are listed in order of oldest surviving manuscript evidence:

• Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS): These are a collection of texts discovered between 1946 CE and 1956 CE inside caves near the Dead Sea. The texts are of great religious significance because they include the earliest known surviving manuscripts of the Old Testament but many are fragmentary. The scrolls date from approximately 150 BCE to 70 CE.
• Septuagint (LXX): This is the primary Greek translation of the Old Testament. It was completed by Jewish scholars in the late 2nd century BCE and the oldest manuscript evidence is the 2nd century BCE. Relatively complete manuscripts of the LXX include the Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus of the 4th century CE. These are the oldest surviving nearly complete manuscripts of the Old Testament in any language.
• Masoretic Text (MT): This is the authoritative Hebrew text of the Old Testament. The oldest extant manuscripts date from around the 9th century CE. This version is favored by mainstream Judaism.
• Samaritan Torah (ST): This is the Samaritan version of the Torah written in the Samaritan alphabet that is derived from the paleo-Hebrew alphabet used by the Israelite community prior to Babylonian captivity. The Samaritans represent a sect of Judaism that split off from the mainstream. There are still a few hundred Samaritans living in modern-day Israel. The oldest extant manuscripts date from around the 11th century CE.

The reason why these are classified as different versions, as opposed to different translations, is because there are many thousands of variations that exist between these texts. So how can scholars identify the version of the Torah that is closest to the original Torah given to Mūsā (Moses) عليه السلام? Unfortunately it is not as simple as just taking the version that has the oldest surviving manuscripts, which would be the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), but the problem is that the DSS are highly fragmentary and only contain small portions of the Torah; nor can we take the version with the earliest complete manuscript tradition, which would be the Septuagint (LXX), as this contains verses that are different to the earlier DSS. The Masoretic Text (MT), which is very late in terms of manuscripts compared to the LXX, actually agrees with the DSS in some places where the LXX disagrees.

In the example above, the 32nd chapter of the Book of Deuteronomy is compared between the DSS, LXX and MT. Two verses are compared: 32:8 and 32:43. Even though the chapter of Deuteronomy is being compared between the texts, they do not completely agree in all verses. Sometimes the DSS agree with the MT over the LXX, as in verse 32:43, and sometimes the DSS agree with the LXX over the MT, as in verse 32:8. There are thousands of variations that exist between the different versions.

Genesis 5:31:
LXX: All the days of Lamech were 753 years…
MT: All the days of Lamech were 777 years…
ST: All the days of Lamech were 653 years…

Exodus 12:40:
LXX: Now the length of time the Israelite people lived in Egypt and Canaan was 430 years.
MT: Now the length of time the Israelite people lived in Egypt (only) was 430 years.
ST: (Same as LXX).

Most variations are minor and do not significantly alter the meaning of scripture, such as the spelling of words, grammatical constructions, and discrepancies in numbers. However, there are variations that significantly change the meaning of verses. For example, the variations of Genesis 16:12 contradict each other on how to describe Ismāʿīl (Ishmael) عليه السلام. He is described to be either wild or fruitful. The former description appears to be quite negative, while the latter description is positive [1].

Genesis 16:12:
LXX: (Ishmael) shall be a wild man…
MT: (Ishmael) shall be a wild man…
ST: (Ishmael) shall be a fruitful man…

Before anyone makes the claim that they have the original Torah, they must first deal with the problem of establishing which version of the Torah, if any, is authoritative. Unfortunately, no one knows with certainty which version is the closest to the original Torah given to Mūsā عليه السلام. The proof of this is the way in which scholars of the Bible construct modern translations. Every modern translation of the Bible is essentially an eclectic translation because it combines from the different versions of the Torah. Sometimes scholars go with manuscripts of the MT, sometimes the LXX, and sometimes the ST. By borrowing from the different manuscripts, they are essentially creating a new Torah that never existed before.

Torah contradictions

The versions of the Torah have variations that contradict each other. Even if one could determine which version of the Torah is authoritative, it is not only the variations that contradict each other; the verses themselves contradict each other. For example, it is clear from Genesis 21:14-19 that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was a young child or likely a baby when he and his mother Hājar (Hagar) رضي الله عنها were sent into the desert, yet the Bible teaches that he was at least sixteen years old when he was sent into the desert. Hājar رضي الله عنها was the Egyptian maidservant of Sārah (Sarah) رضي الله عنها, the wife of Ibrāhīm (Abraham) عليه السلام. Sārah رضي الله عنها was having difficulty conceiving a child, so she offered her maidservant to her husband so that he could have children through her. Hājar رضي الله عنها became another wife of Ibrāhīm عليه السلام (Genesis 16:3). According to the Bible, Sārah رضي الله عنها later had a child named Isḥāq (Isaac) عليه السلام who was weaned as he grew up, but Sārah رضي الله عنها saw that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was mocking Isḥāq عليه السلام, and so she told her husband to expel Hājar رضي الله عنها and Ismāʿīl عليه السلام. They went off to the desert and experienced great hardships, but God rescued them. However, if Ismāʿīl عليه السلام and his mother went to the desert when he was a young child or a baby, then he could not have mocked Isḥāq عليه السلام since the latter would not have been born yet.

Early the next morning Abraham took some food and a skin of water and gave them to Hagar. He set them on her shoulders and then sent her off with the boy. She went on her way and wandered in the Desert of Beersheba. When the water in the skin was gone, she put the boy under one of the bushes. Then she went off and sat down about a bowshot away, for she thought, "I cannot watch the boy die." And as she sat there, she began to sob. God heard the boy crying, and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven and said to her, "What is the matter, Hagar? Do not be afraid; God has heard the boy crying as he lies there. Lift the boy up and take him by the hand, for I will make him into a great nation." Then God opened her eyes and she saw a well of water. So she went and filled the skin with water and gave the boy a drink (Genesis 21:14-19).

It is possible to calculate the approximate age of Ismāʿīl عليه السلام when he was sent into the desert with his mother. According to Genesis 16:16, Ibrāhīm عليه السلام was 86 years old when his firstborn son Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was born. According to Genesis 21:5, he was one hundred years old when Isḥāq عليه السلام was born. It follows that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was already fourteen years old when his younger half-brother Isḥāq عليه السلام was born. According to Genesis 21:8-10, the desert incident took place after Isḥāq عليه السلام was weaned.

The child grew and was weaned, and on the day Isaac was weaned Abraham held a great feast. But Sarah saw that the son whom Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham was mocking, and she said to Abraham, "Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that woman's son will never share in the inheritance with my son Isaac."

According to tradition, Isḥāq عليه السلام was two years old when he was weaned. Three years is the age of weaning mentioned in 2 Chronicles 31:16 and 2 Maccabees 7:27. Thus, it follows that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was sixteen or seventeen years old when he and his mother went to the desert. The problem is that the profile of Ismāʿīl عليه السلام in Genesis 21:14-19 is that of a small child. Recall that it was Hājar رضي الله عنها that carried the supplies into the desert (Genesis 21:14). If Ismāʿīl عليه السلام were a teenager, then it would have been reasonable for him to have carried at least some of the supplies to lessen the burden on his mother.

Furthermore, it is said that Hājar رضي الله عنها put Ismāʿīl عليه السلام under a bush (Genesis 21:15). The Hebrew word used in the verse is ‘shalak‘, which, according to Strong’s Hebrew Lexicon, has the meaning to throw, cast, hurl, or fling. A mother does not throw, cast, hurl or fling a teenage son, especially when she is suffering from fatigue due to a harsh environment. She is also told to lift up the boy (Genesis 21:18). Additionally, even though it was Ismāʿīl عليه السلام that was crying, God consoled the mother (Genesis 21:17). This could be taken to imply that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was too young to converse with. Finally, it’s worth mentioning that the Septuagint version of the Torah says the following for Genesis 21:14:

And Abraam rose up in the morning and took loaves and a skin of water, and gave them to Agar, and he put the child on her shoulder and sent her away, and she having departed wandered in the wilderness near the well of the oath.

The Septuagint version is even more explicit in conveying that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was a young child when he was sent into the desert. Interestingly, Islāmic sources also mention that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was a baby at the time that he was sent into the desert. All of these points demonstrate that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was a baby or at least a small child when he was sent into the desert, so there is a clear contradiction in the text. If the Torah has been preserved, then one should not expect to find any contradictions within the text, especially considering that God’s words are perfect. Either the Torah was never God’s word or it was at one point but was later corrupted.

Motivation for corruption

If it was corrupted, one should ask why was it corrupted. As shown previously, it is mentioned in the Torah that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام shall grow up to be a wild man. It also states that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام mocked Isḥāq عليه السلام. It appears that the Torah tends to portray Ismāʿīl عليه السلام in a negative light. Ismāʿīl عليه السلام is the progenitor of the Arabs, while Isḥāq عليه السلام is the father of Yaʿqūb (Jacob) عليه السلام, who is the progenitor of the Jews. Yaʿqūb عليه السلام is also known as Isrāʾīl (Israel).

Judaism, Christianity, and Islām affirm that Ibrāhīm عليه السلام was tested by God and was commanded to sacrifice his son. Just as Ibrāhīm عليه السلام was about to sacrifice his son, God replaced his son with a sacrificial animal. Judaism and Christianity teach that it was Isḥāq عليه السلام that was to be sacrificed, while Islām teaches that it was Ismāʿīl عليه السلام that was to be sacrificed [2]. Genesis 17:2 mentions that God will make a covenant with Ibrāhīm عليه السلام and that he will increase his numbers. Ibrāhīm عليه السلام was promised to be the father of many nations, and so Genesis 17:5 states that his named was changed from Abram to Abraham (Ibrāhīm). The land of Canaan was also promised to his descendants, and the sign of the covenant is that the males of his household, as well as people he buys with money, are to be circumcised (Genesis 17:7-14). He is then given the glad tidings that Isḥāq عليه السلام will be born and is told that the covenant will apply to his descendants through Isḥāq عليه السلام, although Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was also blessed and circumcised on the same day his father was circumcised, as well as other males in the household, including people bought from foreigners (Genesis 17:15-27). As a result, some Jewish and Christian perspectives hold that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was blessed but not included in the covenant, which they believe was established exclusively through Isḥāq عليه السلام. Others, however, interpret that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was also included in the covenant, even though the covenant is primarily centered on Isḥāq عليه السلام and his descendants.

The fact that the sign of the covenant includes circumcision, and Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was circumcised, indicates he was included within the covenant. Later on, Isḥāq عليه السلام was born, and Genesis 22 mentions that God commanded Ibrāhīm عليه السلام to sacrifice Isḥāq عليه السلام. Strangely, the passage tells Ibrāhīm عليه السلام to sacrifice his only son Isḥāq عليه السلام, even though Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was his first born son.

Then God said, "Take your son, your only son, whom you love, Isaac, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you" (Genesis 22:2).

The angel of the Lord called to Abraham from heaven a second time and said, "I swear by myself, declares the Lord, that because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies, and through your offspring, all nations on earth will be blessed because you have obeyed me" (Genesis 22:15-8).

The context better fits Ismāʿīl عليه السلام because Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was for many years the only son of Ibrāhīm عليه السلام. Some Jews and Christians may respond that what is meant by 'only son' is the only son that is loved. This is a poor response, as there is no evidence that Ibrāhīm عليه السلام did not love his first born son Ismāʿīl عليه السلام. Furthermore, Genesis 17:18 mentions that Ibrāhīm عليه السلام asked God to bless Ismāʿīl عليه السلام. Ibrāhīm عليه السلام also shows great concern for Ismāʿīl عليه السلام (Genesis 21:11) [3].

Jews and Christians may claim that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام is an illegitimate child, so perhaps this is why Isḥāq عليه السلام is called the only son. It is a great accusation to say that Ibrāhīm عليه السلام fathered an illegitimate child. Throughout the Old Testament, Ismāʿīl عليه السلام is called the son of Ibrāhīm عليه السلام. Moreover, Ibrāhīm عليه السلام took Hājar رضي الله عنها as a wife (Genesis 16:3). Even if Hājar رضي الله عنها was the mistress of Sārah رضي الله عنها and was of a lower social status, she was still, nevertheless, a wife of Ibrāhīm عليه السلام. Thus, Ismāʿīl عليه السلام is a perfectly legitimate son of Ibrāhīm عليه السلام.

Earlier in Genesis, God made a covenant with Ibrāhīm عليه السلام that his descendants will be given the land from the Nile to the Euphrates (Genesis 15:18). It is also mentioned that his descendants will be as numerous as the stars in the sky (Genesis 5:15). The Arabs vastly outnumber the Jews, with the former currently numbering more than 492 million people, while the latter currently number 15.8 million [4] [5]. As for the land from the Nile to the Euphrates, the Jews have never controlled all of this land, but the Arabs have [6]. In fact, it was through Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ that the Arabs conquered all of this land and beyond for the cause of Islām.

The Arabs ruled the land from the Nile to the Euphrates, and they by far outnumber the Jews who descend from Isḥāq عليه السلام and Yaʿqūb عليه السلام. The Arabs have conquered far more territory than the Jews. As for circumcision, the vast majority of both Jews and Arabs are circumcised. It is also through the descendants of Ibrāhīm عليه السلام that the nations will be blessed. Muslims believe that the nations were blessed through the Arab prophet Muḥammad ﷺ, a descendant of Ibrāhīm عليه السلام and Ismāʿīl عليه السلام. According to Islām, all prophets were only sent to their own people, while Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ was sent to the world. The Muslims, who were at the time of Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ mainly Arabs, managed to destroy idolatry within the Arabian Peninsula and within the land from the Nile to the Euphrates and far beyond. As for the Jews, they had difficulty being faithful to monotheism, let alone spreading it to others. In fact, Professor Karen Armstrong writes:

We have seen that it took the ancient Israelites some seven hundred years to break with their old religious allegiances and accept monotheism but Muhammad managed to help the Arabs achieve this difficult transition in a mere twenty-three years [7].

The Jews believe that the Jewish people as a whole is the reason that the nations are be blessed. Some of them are waiting for their messiah to arrive and believe that their messiah will be the means for the nations to be blessed. Muslims and Christians believe that ʿĪsā (Jesus) عليه السلام is the Messiah, while Jews reject this, but Christians believe that the nations were blessed through ʿĪsā عليه السلام who descended from Ibrāhīm عليه السلام, Isḥāq عليه السلام, and Yaʿqūb عليه السلام. They may point to the fact that Christianity is currently the largest religion. However, Christianity has deviated from true monotheism, so Christians have actually spread polytheism to the nations, and this is antithetical to the monotheism of the Old Testament. Furthermore, most Christians are not circumcised.

It is more reasonable to believe that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was the sacrificial son and the heir of the covenant. The Old Testament says that Ibrāhīm عليه السلام was commanded to sacrifice his only son. Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was his only son at one point, and he was a legitimate son. The context of the covenant mentioned in the Old Testament is more compatible with Ismāʿīl عليه السلام than Isḥāq عليه السلام. The covenant is fulfilled with the conversion of the Arabs to Islām, as a result of the mission of Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ. The most probable motive for why the Jews would corrupt their scriptures is envy. It is mentioned in the Encyclopaedia Judaica and in Islāmic sources that some Jewish converts admitted to the Umayyad ruler ʿUmar ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz that the Jews know that the sacrificial son was indeed Ismāʿīl عليه السلام, but they were jealous.

In the tale of binding (Sūrah 37:99-110), Muhammad identified the son who was to be sacrificed as Ishmael and, indeed, the opinion of the traditionalists were also divided on this subject. It is related that a renowned traditionalist of Jewish origin, from the Qurayza tribe, and another Jewish scholar, who converted to Islam, told that Caliph Omar ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz (717-20) that the Jews were well informed that Ismāʿīl was the one who was bound, but that they concealed this out of jealousy. The Muslim legend also adds details of Hājar (Hagar), the mother of Ismāʿīl. After Abraham drove her and her son out, she wandered between the hills of al-Safa and al-Marwa (in the vicinity of Mecca) in search for water. At that time the waters of the spring Zemzem began to flow. Her acts became the basis for the hallowed custom of Muslims during the Ḥajj [8].

The following is a summary of the evidences that indicate why Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was the sacrificial son:

• The descendants of Ibrāhīm عليه السلام will have the land between the Nile and the Euphrates, which includes Canaan.
• The descendants of Ibrāhīm عليه السلام will be numerous.
• The descendants of Ibrāhīm عليه السلام will conquer the cities of their enemies.
• Circumcision is a sign of the covenant.
• Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was at one point the only son of Ibrāhīm عليه السلام.
• The nations will be blessed through the offspring of Ibrāhīm عليه السلام.

No explicit claims of Mosaic authorship

Jews and Christians believe that the Torah they have today represents the original words of God as dictated to Mūsā (Moses) عليه السلام, who wrote them down. Despite this, there is no claim within the Torah itself that Mūsā عليه السلام wrote all five books. To the contrary, there are strong indications that they were written by someone other than Mūsā عليه السلام. For example, there is a use of the third-person narrative throughout the Book of Exodus.

Then He said, "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob." At this, Moses hid his face, because he was afraid to look at God (Exodus 3:6).

Clearly, a third person such as a scribe or chronicler wrote these accounts and not Mūsā عليه السلام himself. If he had been the writer, then the first-person narrative would have been used. Another issue is that of anachronisms. These are details that do not fit in with the supposed time of writing. For example, the death of Mūsā عليه السلام happens before the book of Deuteronomy ends.

Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died, yet his eyes were not weak nor his strength gone (Deuteronomy 34:7).

A verse also says that Mūsā عليه السلام is the most humble person on earth.

Now Moses was a very humble man, more humble than anyone else on the face of the earth (Numbers 12:3).

This would be a very odd statement indeed if Mūsā عليه السلام himself were its author, as it would mean he was boasting about his own humility.

Transmission gaps

There is a 1,000-year missing link in the transmission of the Torah. The Dead Sea Scrolls, the earliest manuscript evidence for the Torah, date from around 150 BCE – 70 CE. The scrolls include fragments of all five books of the Torah. Considering that Moses lived around 1300 BCE, this means that there is no manuscript evidence of the Torah until around 1000 years after Mūsā عليه السلام. Moreover, within the Old Testament itself there is strong evidence of transmission breaks.

1. There is a transmission break between Mūsā عليه السلام (approx. 1300 BCE) and King Josiah (approx. 600 BCE). It is Hilkiah the high priest who discovers the lost Torah.

Hilkiah the high priest said to Shaphan the secretary, "I have found the Book of the Law in the temple of the Lord." He gave it to Shaphan, who read it (2 Kings 22:8).

King Josiah tears his clothes when he learns of the discovery.

When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law, he tore his robes (2 Kings 22:11).

Now this is the key point: after reading the Torah, they proceed to remove all aspects of idolatry and the occult.

Furthermore, Josiah got rid of the mediums and spiritists, the household gods, the idols and all the other detestable things seen in Judah and Jerusalem. This he did to fulfill the requirements of the law written in the book that Hilkiah the priest had discovered in the temple of the Lord (2 Kings 23:24).

If the Torah had never been lost, then they would have all known about the prohibition on idolatry in Deuteronomy 12:2. Clearly, they had not seen the Torah in a very long time.

2. There is another transmission break between King Josiah (approx. 600 BCE) and Ezra (approx. 400 BCE). After the return to Jerusalem from exile, Ezra the scribe reads the Torah to the Israelites.

All the people came together as one in the square before the Water Gate. They told Ezra the teacher of the Law to bring out the Book of the Law of Moses, which the Lord had commanded for Israel (Nehemiah 8:1).

He reads to them details of how they are to celebrate a particular festival. They had not celebrated the festival in this manner for a very long time.

They found written in the Law, which the Lord had commanded through Moses, that the Israelites were to live in temporary shelters during the festival of the seventh month (Nehemiah 8:14).

The whole company that had returned from exile built temporary shelters and lived in them. From the days of Joshua son of Nun until that day, the Israelites had not celebrated it like this. And their joy was very great. (Nehemiah 8:17).

Whatever Ezra had been a scribe of before had not included important parts of the Torah. This is because the commandments for the celebration are found in Leviticus 23:42. Clearly then they had not seen the book of Leviticus in a very long time.

The New Testament shows the corruption of the Old Testament

When you read a number of Torah references in the New Testament, the New Testament writers are actually quoting from the Greek version of the Torah, the Septuagint. Paul, a writer of some of the books within the New Testament, references Deuteronomy 32:43.

And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, "Let all God's angels worship him" (Hebrews 1:6).

The figure below compares this verse in the Masoretic and Septuagint versions of the Torah.

Notice that the Masoretic Text has no mention of angels worshipping God. However, the Greek Septuagint does contain the quote. This is just one example of many where the New Testament authors favored the Greek Septuagint over the Masoretic Text, which is written in Hebrew. Most of the Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew, so it may come as a surprise to Christian readers to learn that this Greek version of the Old Testament is referenced in the New Testament instead of the Hebrew text. The question then naturally arises, where is the original Hebrew text that the Greek Septuagint is based on? From the point of view of Christians, this original Hebrew text must be important if the inspired writers of the New Testament chose to quote from the Septuagint. The answer is that this earlier Hebrew text is a lost version of the Torah that the New Testament authors believed were the inspired words of God.

Jude and the lost Book of Enoch

One of the startling discoveries among the Dead Sea Scrolls were the presence of apocryphal texts not found in the modern Old Testament. In 1956 CE, during the excavation of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Book of Enoch, also known as 1 Enoch, was discovered. The Book of Jude in the New Testament actually quotes from the lost Book of Enoch.

It was also about these men that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with many thousands of His holy ones, to execute judgment upon all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their ungodly deeds which they have done in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him" (Jude 1:14-5).

The above verses, a quotation from Enoch, are not to be found anywhere in the modern Bible, but they can be found in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of holy ones to execute judgement upon all, and to destroy (all) the ungodly: and to convict all flesh of all the works (of their ungodliness) which they have ungodly committed, and of all the hard things which ungodly sinners (have spoken) against Him (Enoch 1:9).

Here is a situation of a canonical book (Jude) quoting a non-canonical book (Enoch). Either the Old Testament is incomplete, or the New Testament author made a mistake in quoting from a non-canonical text.

Hebrew as a lost language

If the Hebrew language was lost, then the Torah would essentially be lost as well. What use is having the perfect preservation of the content of scripture if the meanings of the words it is written in is also lost? One would not be able to properly understand scripture; it would be like having a lock without the key. Hebrew was a dead language from the second century CE until the late nineteenth century CE. Even though the Torah was originally revealed to Mūsā عليه السلام over three thousand years ago, the first Hebrew lexicon was not created until the tenth century CE. There are no older lexicons, but Jews do have oral traditions, such as the Mishnah, where they study the Torah and the meanings of words, but they did not have a systematic lexicography that the Muslims have; this idea seems to have been borrowed from the Muslims. It's a known fact that in Hebrew studies, Hebrew scholars are often required to go to classical Arabic dictionaries to see what the Arabs had to say about the roots of words; this is because Arabic and Hebrew are both Semitic languages and share many words with similar meaning. This allows Hebrew scholars to get a better understanding of their own root structures [9].

How the corruption of the Torah affects Judaism and Christianity

The Torah had contradictory versions, contradictions within its text, and lengthy transmission gaps. This raises serious challenges to the truth claims of both Judaism and Christianity. Judaism is built upon the Torah as its foundational text, containing core laws, teachings, and historical narratives that define Jewish identity and belief. If it cannot be trusted in its current form, then the reliability of much of Jewish law and teaching becomes uncertain. Christianity, while centered on the New Testament, also relies heavily on the Torah, as part of the Old Testament, to support its claims about ʿĪsā (Jesus) عليه السلام. A corrupted Torah undermines the continuity between the Old and New Testaments, making it difficult to validate Christian doctrine using the Old Testament. This is not to mention the significant issues found within the New Testament itself; however, the corruption of the Torah alone is enough to raise serious doubts concerning both religions, since both Jews and Christians base major aspects of their faith on it. If the Torah has been corrupted, then the divine authority of both religions comes into question.

[1] While some variations of Genesis 16:12 call Ismāʿīl عليه السلام a wild donkey of a man, some claim that this description is not necessarily negative. In Job 39:5-8, the donkey is described as a free creature that inhabits the wilderness. In the Bible, sometimes the word 'desert' is used in place of 'wilderness'. Ismāʿīl عليه السلام went on to inhabit the desert.
[2] A minority of Islāmic scholars (ʿulamāʾ) in the past held the view that the sacrificial son was Isḥāq عليه السلام. Today, there appears to be ijmāʿ (consensus) among ʿulamāʾ that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was the chosen son. Within Islām, there are traditions known as 'Isrāʾīlīyyāt,' which are essentially passed down to Muslims from Jews and Christians. These traditions may provide supplementary context to the Qurʾān. However, due to the corruption of Jewish and Christian scriptures, Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ advised the Muslims to neither believe nor disbelieve these traditions but to instead keep an agnostic stance. If traditions from Jews and Christians are in agreement with the Qurʾān and Sunnah, then they are accepted, and if they contradict them, then they are rejected. If the traditions are neither in agreement nor in conflict with the Qurʾān and Sunnah, then Muslims are to neither accept nor reject these traditions (Ṣaḥīḥ Al-Bukhārī 7362). Since the Qurʾān does not explicitly state the name of the chosen son, it is likely that those ʿulamāʾ that held the view that the sacrificial son was Isḥāq عليه السلام seemed to have been influenced by Isrāʾīlīyyāt. The Qurʾān does, however, seem to suggest that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام was the sacrificial son (Qurʾān 37:100-112). It mentions that Ibrāhīm عليه السلام and his wife Sārah رضي الله عنها were given the glad tidings that they would have a son named Isḥāq عليه السلام and that he would have a son named Yaʿqūb عليه السلام (Qur'ān 11:71). Thus, the Qurʾān cannot be interpreted to mean that it was Isḥāq عليه السلام who was supposed to be the sacrificial son because Ibrāhīm عليه السلام and his wife knew that he would have progeny. Furthermore, Jews, Christians, and Muslims agree that the sacrificial event took place before Yaʿqūb عليه السلام was born. All of this shows that the Qurʾān indicates that it was Ismāʿīl عليه السلام who was chosen to be the sacrifice. As for the Aḥādīth, they are more explicit in showing that the sacrificial son was Ismāʿīl عليه السلام (See: Isrāʾīlīyyāt wa al-Mawḍūʿāt fī Kutub at-Tafsīr, Maktabat as-Sunnah (4th edition) - 1408AH/1988, p. 254).
[3] Deuteronomy 21:15-7 commands that a father must honor the legal rights of his true firstborn son, even if that son is from a wife he does not love. He cannot favor another son out of personal preference; the firstborn must receive a double portion of the inheritance. Thus, Muslims may argue that Ismāʿīl عليه السلام deserved a double share compared to Isḥāq عليه السلام, even if the former was not loved by Ibrāhīm عليه السلام. However, this is not a strong argument because the laws of Deuteronomy apply to the Jews and not to Ibrāhīm عليه السلام.
[4] https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?locations=1A.
[5] Dashefsky, Arnold; Sheskin, Ira M., eds. (2024). American Jewish Year Book 2023. American Jewish Year Book. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-67478-5. ISSN 0065-8987.
[6] Many Zionist hardliners seek to ultimately expand the borders of the Jewish state of Israel from the Nile to the Euphrates.
[7] Armstrong, Karen (1993). A History of God, p. 146.
[8] Encyclopaedia Judaica, Volume 9, Encyclopaedia Judaica Jerusalem, p. 82 (Under 'Ishmael').
[9] Kaltner, John, The Use of Arabic in Biblical Hebrew Lexicography (Washington, D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1996).