0 (800) 420-78-78
8500, Gray Street, Chicago, IL, 55030


Click here for previous session





Omission No. 1: The Length of the Israelites’ Stay in Egypt

The Book of Genesis contains this statement:

And he said unto Abram. Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a
stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall
afflict them four hundred years 117
The statement “and shall afflict them four hundred years,” and another
similar statement contained in verse 14 of the same chapter, which is, “When
they shall serve and afterwards shall they come out with great substance,” both
clearly denote that the land referred to here is the land of Egypt, because those
who afflicted the Israelites and made them their servants and then were
punished by God were none but the Egyptians. It was from Egypt that they
came out with great wealth. This description does not fit any other place.
However, Exodus 2:40 contradicts the above statement:
Now that sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt was
four hundred and thirty years.
The period of sojourn is different in the two verses. Either the word “thirty”
has been omitted from the first verse or added to the latter. Besides, the period
described by both verses is certainly not correct for the following reasons.
Firstly, the Prophet Moses was the grandson of Levi on his mother’s side,
and great grandson on his father’s side. On his mother’s side he is the son of
Jochebed, the daughter of Levi, while on his father’s side he is the son of
Amran, son of Kohath, son of Levi. This implies that Amran married his aunt,
the sister of his father as is indeed understood from Exodus 6, and Numbers 26.
Kohath, the grandfather of Moses was born before the Israelites came into
Egypt, a fact which can be ascertained from Genesis 26:11. The period of the
Israelites’ stay in Egypt cannot therefore exceed 215 years.
Secondly, almost all the Christian commentators and historians are
unanimous on the point that the period of the Israelites’ stay in Egypt is 215
years. The Arabic book Murshid at-Talibeen, written by a Protestant scholar and
printed in 1840, contains the chronology of the events from the beginning of the
creation to the birth of Jesus. Each event is preceded and followed by a year.
The preceding year denotes the number of years from the creation of the world
while the following year signifies the number of year.’ from that event to the
birth of Jesus. On page 346 of this book, describing the stay of the Prophet
Joseph and his father and brother; in Egypt, it says:
2298: Joseph’s and his father’s stay: 1760.
2513: Crossing of the Red Sea by the Israelites and the Drowning of
Pharaoh: 1491.

Now a deduction of either of the smaller numbers from the greater ones
gives us 215, thus:
2513 – 2298 = 215
1706 – 1491 = 215
Thirdly Paul’s letter to the Galatians says:
Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And
to seeds, as of many; but as of one. And to thy seed, which is Christ. And
this I say, that the covenant that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the
law which was four hundred and thirty years after cannot disannul that it
should make the promise of none effect.
This statement is in clear contradiction of the statement found in Exodus,
where the total period from the promise to the revelation of the Torah is
described as four hundred and thirty years, while this promise to Abraham was
made much earlier than the coming of the Israelites to Egypt, and the Torah was
revealed to Moses long after their exodus from Egypt. This implies that the total
period of their stay in Egypt was much less than 430 years 119 Since this
statement was erroneous it was corrected in the Greek and Samaritan versions
with these words:
And the sojourning of the children of Israel and their forefathers who
dwelt in Egypt and Canaan was four hundred and thirty years.
That is, the word “forefather:” and “Canaan” were added to the above text in
both the versions. Adam Clarke under his comments on this verse said on page
’369 of volume one:
There is unanimous agreement on the fact that the meanings of this verse
are obscure and doubtful.
We may be allowed to contend that the contents of this verse are not obscure
and doubtful but they are certainly wrong, as we intend to show very soon. The
author further quoted from the Samaritan version and said:
The reading of the text of Alexandrinus is similar to that of the Samaritan
version. Many learned scholars have decided that the Samaritan version is
the most reliable, as far as the five books of the Pentateuch are concerned.
And it is an established fact that the text of Alexandrinus is older and the most authentic of all the Greek translations and Paul’s statement is not doubted by any one. Now this matter has been decided by the witness of the
above three versions. Besides, there are historical evidences to favour this
opinion. Isaac was born 25 years after Abraham’s coming to Canaan and
Isaac was 60 years old when Jacob was born to him, and Jacob 130 years of
age when he came to Egypt. All this adds up to 215 years, which is the total
period of stay of the Israelites in Egypt, in this way the total number of years
becomes 430 years.
Henry and Scott’s compilers also acknowledge that the total period of the
stay in Egypt is 215 years. Quoting from the Samaritan version they said:
There is no doubt that this text is correct and explains the difficulties
raised by the text.
The above shows that Christian scholars can find no explanation for the
above text of Exodus and have to admit its being erroneous. Paul’s description
as quoted above is also not free from error, because he counted the period from
the time of the promise, which is one year prior to the birth of Isaac, as is known
from Genesis 17:21 referred to above:
But my covenant will I establish with Isaac which Sarah shall bear unto
thee at this set time in the next year.
The Torah was given to them three months after the exodus from Egypt as is
described in chapter 19 of Exodus. Now according to calculations of Adam
Clarke this total period comes to 407 years and not 430 years. The same
calculations are found in the books of history by Protestant a writer which is
contrary to what Paul claimed, that is 430 years. The book ‘Murshid at-
Talibeen’ says on page 345:
2107: God’s covenant with Abraham, change of his name to Abraham,
Institution of circumcision. Lot’s escape. Death of Hadum, Amra,
Adaira and Zebaim on account of their misdeeds….1897.
Further on page 347 it records:
2514: Ordination of ‘the Laws’ on Mount Sinai..1490.
Now the smaller number deduced from the larger gives 407.
2514 – 2107 = 407

1897 – 1490 = 407 120

Omission No. 2 

The Book of Genesis states:
And 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 slew him
The Samaritan. Greek, and other ancient translations describe it in these
And Cain said unto Abel his brother, Rise let us go into the field, and it
came to pass that they were in the field etc.
The phrase, “let us go in the field” is omitted in the Hebrew version. Home
said on page 193 of vol. 2, of his commentary:
This is present in the Samaritan, Greek, and Syrian versions, as well as in
the Latin edition printed in Vulgate and Walton. Kennicott decided that it
should be included in the Hebrew version. No doubt this is a good
Further on page 338 of the same volume he said:
Sometimes the text of Greek version is more correct but it is not found in
the current Hebrew translations. For example the Hebrew translations,
printed or handwritten manuscripts, are defective with regard to this verse.
And the translator of the English authorised version could not understand
this verse. He therefore translated, ’and Cain talked to his brother Abel.’
This defect has been made up in the Greek version. This version became
similar to the Samaritan, Latin, Syrian and Akola translations, and also to the
two commentaries in the two Chaldean languages, and according to the
sentence copied by Philo.
Adam Clarke said the same as was said by Home. This passage was included
in the Arabic translation of 1831 and 1848.

Omission No. 3

The book of Genesis 7:17 of the Hebrew version contains:
And the flood was forty days upon the earth.
The same sentence appears; in many Latin and Greek translations:
And the flood was forty days and nights upon the earth. Horne said in his
first volume:
The word “nights” ought to be added in the Hebrew version.

Omission No. 4

Genesis 35:22 in the Hebrew version reads as follows:
And it came to pass when Israel dwelt in that land that Rueben went and
lay with Bilhah, his father’s concubine and Israel heard it.
The compilers of Henry and Scott said:
The Jews admit that something from this verse has been certainly
omitted. The Latin version has supplemented the words with, ”he was evil in
his sight,” to compensate for the omission.
This is clear example of omission in the text as admitted by the Jews which
is hardly surprising in view of their normal practice of changing their holy texts.

Omission No. 5

Horsley commenting on Genesis 44:5 said on page 82 of volume one of his
At the beginning of this verse in the Greek translation the following
sentence has been added, ”Why hast thou robbed me of my measure.”
According to him the above sentence was omitted in the Hebrew version.

Omission No. 6

The Book of Genesis chapter 50 verse 25 contains: And ye shall carry up my bones from hence. 

The Samaritan, Latin and Greek translations and other old versions have it in these words:
And ye shall carry up my bones with ye.
The words “with ye” have been omitted from the Hebrew version. Horne
Mr. Boothroyd has inserted these omitted words in his new translation of
the Bible and he has done right.

Omission No. 7

Exodus 2:22 contains:
And she bare him a son, and he called his name Gershom 122 for he said,
I have been stranger in a strange land.
The text of the Greek, Latin and other old translations is followed by the
following additional statement:
And a second time also she bare him a son and he called his name
Eleazar, for he said the lord of my father helped me and saved me from the
sword of Pharaoh.
Adam Clarke, quoting the above passage from the translations said on page
310 of volume one:
Houbigant has included this passage in his Latin translation and claimed
that the proper place of this passage was here, while none of the Hebrew
versions, printed or manuscript, contains this. It is present in all the authentic

Omission No. 8

The book of Exodus 6:20 says:
And she bare him Aaron and Moses and Mary, their sister.

The words ‘their sister’ have been omitted in the Hebrew version. Adam
Clarke after reproducing the text of the Greek and Samaritan version said:
Some great scholars think that these words were present in the Hebrew

Omission No. 9

Numbers chapter 10 verse 6 has:
When ye blow an alarm the second time the camps that lie on the south
side shall take their journey.
And at the end of this verse in the Greek version it says:
When ye blow a third time then the camps that lie on the West Side shall
take their journey. And when ye blow a fourth time then the camps that lie
on the north side shall take their journey.
Adam Clarke said on page 663 of volume 1 of his commentary:
The west and the north camps are not mentioned, but it seems that they
used to make their journey at the blowing of an alarm. It proves that the
Hebrew text at this place is defective. The Greek translations added the
following sentence, “And when ye blow a third time the camps on the west
side shall take their journey, and when ye blow a fourth time that are on the
north side shall take journey.”

Omission No. 10

Job 42:17 says:
So Job died, being old and full of days.
The Hebrew version ends at this sentence, while the Greek version contains
the following additional sentence:
He shall resume life a second time with those whom the Lord shall
It has also been supplemented with short description of Job’s genealogy and
other circumstances. Calmet and Harder claim that this supplement is part of the
revealed text. This opinion is favoured by Philo and Polyhistor. It was also acknowledged by the people of Origen’s time. Theodotion also included this supplement in his Greek translation. This proves that the Hebrew version has
been distorted by the omission of the above supplement. Protestant scholars are, however, unanimous on the point that the above supplement is a later addition
and not genuine. The compilers of Henry and Scott’s commentary said:
Apparently it is a forged description, though it was written some time
before Christ.
We may be allowed to ask, if the above passage belongs to the period before
Christ, how did the ancient Christians believe it to be the word of God right
from the time of the Apostles up to the year 1500, because they acknowledged
these translations as genuine, and claimed that the Hebrew version was



…..continue reading…..

774 total views, 0 views today



Leave a comment