What's the oldest copy of the Old Testament?
596451
If you mean the oldest manuscript found, one of the oldest scrolls is 4Q17, which contains Exodus 38 to Leviticus 2. It was copied around 250 B.C. Almost all other books of the Hebrew bible (except Ester) were found in the Dead Sea scrolls, most dating back to at least 100 BC.
659670
The best suggestion I can make is E-bay, used book stores, and a web search. Its out there, but I'm not sure its still in print. A hint: The older the copy of the 6th & 7th books of Moses the more likely it will be that this will be a part of it. I had one YEARS ago and let it get away. Good luck!
988142
No. There has been too much lost in the numerous translations. And I would question your statement about the book being in existence for 'thousands' of years. The new testament and the gospels were not instantly assembled upon the death of Jesus of Nazareth. The old testament was passed on by word of mouth long before the books were written.  Compound these necessary flaws with the council of cardinals who decided which books were going to be part of the bible and which books were not, and the church's practice of censoring anything that did not agree with doctrine, and you have a less than perfect product.
432351
In the bible, we hear of many people who lived for long periods.\nThe oldest mentioned in the bible though, is Methuselah, the grandfather of Noah. He lived for 969 years.
1068056
basically yes that is how the bible started out.  It was in several different scrolls.  The jewish bible or Old Testement was canonized before the time of Christ.\n\nThe Jews recognize the twenty-four books of the Hebrew Bible as the Tanakh. Evidence suggests that the process of canonization of the Tanakh occurred between 200 BCE and 200 CE. The first suggestion of a Jewish Canon comes in the 2nd century BCE. The book of 2 Maccabees, itself not a part of the Jewish canon, describes Nehemiah (around 400 BCE) as having "founded a library and collected books about the kings and prophets, and the writings of David, and letters of kings about votive offerings" (2 Macc 2:13). The book also suggests that Ezra brought the Torah back from Babylon to Jerusalem and the Second Temple as described in Nehemiah 8. Both I and II Maccabees suggest that Judas Maccabeus likewise collected sacred books. They do not, however, suggest that the canon was at that time closed; moreover, it is not clear that these sacred books were identical to those that later became part of the canon.\n\nAdditional evidence of a collection of sacred scripture similar to portions of the Hebrew Bible comes from the book of Sirach (dating from 180 BCE and also not included in the Jewish canon), which includes a list of names of great men in the same order as is found in the Torah and the Nevi'im (Prophets), and which includes the names of some men mentioned in the Ketuvim (Writings). Based on this list of names, some scholars have conjectured that the author, Yeshua ben Sira (Joshua son of Sirach) had access to, and considered authoritative, the books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve minor prophets. His list excludes names from Ruth, Song of Songs, Esther, Daniel, and Job, suggesting that he either did not have access to these books, or did not consider them authoritative. In the prologue to the Greek translation of ben Sirach's work, his grandson mentions both the Torah and the Nevi'im, as well as a third group of books which is not yet named as Ketuvim (the prologue simply identifies "the rest of the books"). Based on this evidence, some scholars have suggested that by the 2nd century BCE the books of the Torah and Nevi'im were considered canonical, but that the books of the Ketuvim were not.\n\nWhen Christianity began, it had no well-defined set of scriptures outside of the Septuagint[1]. The New Testament refers to the "Law and Prophets", for example the Gospel of Luke 24:44-45 records Jesus stating: "written. . .in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms. . .the Scriptures" and Acts of the Apostles 24:14 records Paul of Tarsus stating: "I believe everything that agrees with the Law and that is written in the Prophets". The earliest Christian canon is found in the Bryennios manuscript, published by J.-P. Audet in JTS [3] 1950, v1, pp 135-154, dated to around 100 AD, written in Koine Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew; it is this 27-book OT list: "Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Jesus Nave, Judges, Ruth, 4 of Kings (Samuel and Kings), 2 of Chronicles, 2 of Esdras, Esther, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Job, Minor prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel" (2 of Esdras might include 1 Esdras; Esther, Jeremiah and Daniel might include their Septuagint additions; Jesus Nave[2] is an early translation of Joshua son of Nun). Early Christianity also relied on the Sacred Oral Tradition of what Jesus had said and done, as reported by the apostles and other followers. Even after the Gospels were written and began circulating, some Christians preferred the oral Gospel as told by people they trusted (e.g. Papias, c. 125 AD).\n\nBy the end of the 1st century, some Letters of Paul were collected and circulated, and were known to Clement of Rome (c. 95 AD), Ignatius of Antioch (died
244377
I am thinking the city of Jericho is one of the oldest cities.\nBUT we have signs of Indo Eruopean civilizations 10,000 years old and older.
835188
No. Most of them are copies of OT books, and the rest is commentary on OT laws, etc.  All the biblically based scrolls predate the New Testament era.\n\nJesus was an Essene rabbi. From http://www.centuryone.com/25dssfacts.html\n"The Dead Sea Scrolls were most likely written by the Essenes during the period from about 200 B.C. to 68 C.E./A.D. The Essenes are mentioned by Josephus and in a few other sources, but not in the New testament. The Essenes were a strict Torah observant, Messianic, apocalyptic, baptist, wilderness, new covenant Jewish sect. They were led by a priest they called the 'Teacher of Righteousness,' who was opposed and possibly killed by the establishment priesthood in Jerusalem."\n\nThe fact that Jesus was baptized, taught about the end of the world, etc. - decidedly un-mainstream Jewish doctrines - and was killed at the request of the conventional Jewish establishment -- is clear evidence that Jesus was the leader in the Essene sect in his time. If you want to understand what he intended true Christianity to be, read up on the Essenes.
626839
You want to know the answers to why the Bible is historically accurate and reliable? Well this is going to be long but it will answer your question. This writing discusses common myths held by most people concerning the Bible and analyzes the evidence that points to the Bible’s authenticity.\n\nMyth #1: The Bible’s been copied, translated, and handed down for so long it looks nothing like the original and cannot be reliable anymore.\n\n    This is undeniably a misconception and misinterpretation that’s been around for over a century. It is probably the most common and told myth of the Bible. It has no doubt hindered many people from ever reading and even considering the Word of God.\n\nThe Facts\n    In the early nineteen hundreds scholars started to seriously question the Word of God particularly the Old Testament. Since the earliest copies we had dated to around 900 AD, they started to question how reliable are copies really were. Since we didn’t have the original and since they’ve been copied so many times, we had no idea how accurate our version was. Critics mocked believers of the Bible claiming that the prophecies (particularly about Jesus) could have easily been altered to fit history.\n\n    Enter a small Bedouin boy. In 1947 in an effort to recapture a lost goat he accidentally stumbled upon a cave with hundreds of clay jars found near the Dead Sea in Israel. Further investigation revealed that inside those clay jars lay ancient copies of the Bible written over a century before Jesus. Here were copies of the Old Testament dated around 130 BC written a thousand years earlier than our oldest copies!\n \n    When compared to our version of the Old Testament it was analyzed that the two versions were 95% identical. The 5% variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and variations in spelling. Not a single teaching or main passage of the Bible was in question or in error.  So now we can rest assured that our current Old Testament is completely and utterly reliable because it has not changed in over 2,000 years!\n\nMyth #2 of the Bible: It’s contradictory.\nThe Bible is unbelievably and completely harmonious with itself. In simpler terms the Bible addresses hundreds of controversial topics (i.e., marriage, divorce, salvation, morality) yet from Genesis to Revelation (the first and last books) the Bible is in complete agreement with all of these topics. \n\n    Let me just put this into perspective for you. How often do two people agree on anything? How often do three people agree on the same issue? How about 30? The point is that given the hundreds of books out there hardly any of them agree on any one issue. They are all horribly contradictory with each other. One book says to eat eggs, another says to not eat eggs, yet another one says to eat only the whites of eggs. Which one is right? \n\n    Yet when it comes to the Bible every single topic is completely in agreement with each of the 40+ authors. “But what about the contradictions in the Bible?” you ask. Well, show me them, or simply show me one. Every contradiction that people claim are never actually checked up on. People just believe what other people say and they believe because someone else said it, so on, and so forth. If they actually read the passage they might see that there is no contradiction. In any event saying that there are contradictions in the Bible is just an excuse to keep people from reading the Bible which might contain the very thing people are looking for.\n\nThe Facts\n    Most if not all contradictions are due to interpretation error. There are several tests or principles you must use to determine the meaning of any given passage in the Bible. Some include: 1. You must understand the context of the passage, 2. Interpret difficult passages in the light of clear ones, 3. The Bible uses non-technical, everyday language, 4. Note when the Bible uses different literary devices, 5. Don’t base teaching on obscure passages.
453056
1. The Bible has many versions because translating a language into another language is slightly difficult.\n\n2. There is no "one" correct version. Almost all versions are acceptable but there are 3 different ways of translating. \nA. Some translate the Bible word for word.\nB. Some translate the Bible by paraphrasing and giving you the gist of what the passage means.\nC. Some combine both A and B to give a translation that's readable and hold's true to the original message.\n\n3. The Bible originally was written in Hebrew (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament). In that respect to the ORIGINAL documents there was only ONE version. We have different versions now because we don't all speak Hebrew and Greek.\n\n4. The Quran originally had only one version like the Bible. But through time it has been translated into different languages like the Bible and there are different versions. One such version is the new French translation of the Quran. Of course all Muslims believe that the only way to "really" read the Quran is in the original language. What most people don't know and what they don't tell Muslims in general is that the original copies of the Quran have all been lost when Uthman, the third Caliph(successor of Mohammed), gathered what was left of the Quran, arranged it by the length of Surahs rather than chronologically, then burned all other existing copies! That's why the Quran today is called Uthman's Quran.\n\n5. In fact the Quran is very different from the original copy. Aside from all copies being burned by Uthman leaving us no way of knowing if he changed any of it, the Quran is also under the sway of the doctrine of "al-Nasikh wal-Mansoukh" (the Abrogator and the Abrogated). This simply means that when a recent verse in the Quran gives a contradictory view to another verse that preceded it (chronologically), the recent verse abrogates (cancels and replaces) the old verse and renders it null and void. This doctrine is derived from the Quran where Allah allegedly says in Surah 2:106; \n"None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similiar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?"\nAlso, in Surah 16:101;\n"When we substitute one revelation for another, and Allah knows best what He reveals (in stages), they say, "Thou are but a forger": but most of them understand not."\n\nAccording to Muslim scholars, out of the 114 Surahs (chapters) of the Quran, there are only 43 Surahs that have  not been affected by this concept and had there verses cancelled and replaced.\nThe Bible (Old and New Testament) on the other hand has been preserved with an enourmous amount of greater accuracy.\n\nHope this answered your questions.
549780
probably Hebraic and Aramaic
660863
It is Strong's Concordance (you were VERY close).  If you actually need the physical book, you will be hard pressed to find one for free.  It is one of the largest, heaviest books I have in my library.  I would guess that a new one goes for around $40-50.  You might be able to find one cheap online, but it would be expensive to ship.  I would recommend calling a few used book shops in your area.  You can find software online that you can either download, or use right off the internet, however that you can use for free.  Any online Bible with a search feature does pretty much the same thing.  I like biblegateway.com.  If you specifically need the numbers that go with the search however, I don't think they have that.
726974
One of the best books on this is "The New Evidence That Demands A Verdict" by Josh McDowell.  He is a lawyer who spent years trying to prove that the Bible is false and that Jesus never existed and from independent texts and archaeological sources ended up proving the opposite.  He has a section detailing how priests who copied the manuscripts would, after double checking their copy, go back and count letters in every verse just to insure they hadn't accidently left out or added a letter.\n\n     There are so many manuscripts in existence that they can be compared fairly easily to show there has been no change.  As earlier manuscripts are found it only confirms this more.  It was assumed this would not be the case in the mid 60s and 'experts' from that time are still quoted in academia because they don't like the results of new archaeological discoveries.\n\n     Scholar John Lea compares Shakespeare and the Bible:  He says that it seems strange that the text of Shakespeare, which has been in existence for only a few centuries "should be far more uncertain and corrupt than that of the New Testament, now over eighteen centuries old, during nearly fifteen of which it existed only in manuscript..."\n\n     "With perhaps a dozen or twenty exceptions (mostly involving numbers - my own note) the text of every verse in the New Testament may be said to be so far settled by general consent of scholars, that any dispute as to its readings must relate rather to the intrepretation of the words than to any doubts respeting the words themselves.  But in every one of Shakespeare's thirty-seven plays there are probably a hundred readings still in dispute, a large portion of which materially  affects the meaning of the passages in which they occur."\n\n     Doctor Bernard Ramm notes that "to be skeptical of the resultant text of the New Testament books is to allow all of classical antiquity to slip into obscurity, for no documents of the ancient period are as well attested bibliographically as the New Testament..."\n\n     "Jews...kept tabs on every letter, syllable, word and paragraph.  They had special classes of men within their culture whose sole duty was to preserve and transmit these documents with practically perfect fidelity-scribes, lawyers, massoretes.  Who ever counted the letters and syllables and words of Plato or Aristotle?  Cicero or Seneca?"\n\n     Very few manuscripts exist of most writings we accept from antiquity without question.  I believe Plato is still in the lead with 27 manuscripts in existence of one of his works.  In contrast, thousands of manuscripts of scripture exist that can be crossreferenced and checked for accuracy.\n\n     The party who wrote above that King James had a political agenda with his translation is correct.  It probably colors less than 1% of his translation.  Nevertheless, the New International Version is probably the most accurate translation currently available as it used a multitude of scholars cross checking each others work and went to original Hebrew manuscripts dating to centuries before the latin translation the King James version used (as the original Hebrew ms. had yet to be discovered at the time).  If you read the King James side by side with the New International Version you will find very little difference.  And no difference where core doctrines (teachings) of Christianity are concerned.
543701
I assume you mean which book of the New Testament was written first, because there are no existing original manuscripts as far as we know.\n\nThe general consensus is that some of Paul's letters are the oldest known manuscripts. There are speculations of earlier ones (e.g., "Q") but they are just that: speculations.
639644
God gave the Old Testament to "set the scene" as it were for the coming of His Messiah, which non-Messianic Jews still are looking for, and Christians including Messianic Jews would say is Jesus Christ.  The Old Testament is pretty well divided into parts.  \n\nFirst there is the Pentateuch, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, all of which are believed to be authored by Moses and are commonly referred to as the "Law."  God gave it to show us what His standard is so that in doing so we may realize how far we all fall short of it, and thus, that God alone is justified in judging or condemning, for we are all guilty.  As Jesus said, let Him that is without sin cast the first stone.  The Law in providing the basis for what we know to be wrong, thus shows us we need God's mercy.  \n\nThen come the historical books, like Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 and 2 Chronicles, 1 and 2 Kings, 1 and 2 Samuel, Esther, and Nehemiah.  These chronicle much of Israel's history and God's interaction with people for hundreds of years.  It is often said, those who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it.  I suspect these historical books are given not only that we may understand better God's interaction with people but also common mistakes made by people just like us.  \n\nThen there is the wisdom books, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Song of Solomon, and Ecclesiastes.  In these books is hidden a wealth of wisdom to apply to all venues of everyday life, written by David, Solomon, and Job.  David and Solomon were both 2 of Israel's greatest rulers, and Job was at one point the most influential man in the middle east.  \n\nAnd finally, the remaining books, Isaiah through Malachi, form what is known as the prophets, foretelling of that which is to come, with much about the coming Messiah and other future events.  Sometimes we can even figure out exact dates based on times given like that in Nehemiah 2 {month Nisan, in the 20th year of Artaxerxes the king, or 445 B.C.[1]).  Interestingly, that time allows us to precisely date, when comparing with Daniel 9:25, the exact time when the Messiah is to come.  Since the babylonian calendar time of 360 days was used, you then multiply 360 days * the 69 weeks of 7 years each, so 360 * 69 * 7 or 173,880 days unto "the Messiah, the Prince."  To get our current year we must then divide by 365 to get 476.38356 years, which when added to the 445 B.C. date we have from archeological evidence we get a date of roughly 21-22 A.D when the Messiah was to start His public ministry.  The 70th week which would account for 49 years is said in Daniel 9 to be when the sacrifice and offering would cease.  And in 70 A.D. the temple at Jerusalem was destroyed indeed by Rome, so that the offerings did cease, which today are no longer a custom by Israel.  To see a thorough elaboration of the points, you can see the Scofield note[2] on the topic.  At any rate, many of the prophecies have now been fulfilled, including many Messianic prophecies fulfilled by Jesus[3].\n\n\n\nAs for the New Testament, in it we find the fulfilling of the promises and hints of the grace to come by the Messiah.  We see the fulfilling of the prophecies and the revelation of which the Old Testament prophets could see and show only a shadow of.  It is small wonder then that the last book of the Bible is called "Revelation" for it is God's revelation of that which He has now made clear, known, and open about His long-ago promises.  Grace and truth are now revealed as being free to all in the person of His Son, Jesus Christ.
556452
From Wikipedia,\n\nEsther 8:9 is the longest verse in the Masoretic Text. The discovery of several manuscripts at Qumran (in the Dead Sea Scrolls) has reopened what is considered the most original text of 1 Samuel 11; if one believes that those manuscripts better preserve the text, several verses in 1 Samuel 11 surpass Esther 8:9 in length.
206409
As a historical document, the Old Testament of the Bible (or the Jewish Torah) has stories about women dating back thousands of years with a couple of the books devoted entirely to the story of particular woman (Ruth, Esther).
770858
Dead Sea.\n\nBedouin shepherds accidentally stumbled upon one of the most important religious discoveries of all time -- The Dead Sea Scrolls.\n\nSeven ancient scrolls, written in Aramaic, Herbrew, and Greek, discovered by Bedouin shepherds in 1947, 13 miles east of Jerusalem, turned out to be from the period between 200 B.C. and A.D. 68. The scrolls held information about the Old Testament, including material never seen before in modern times.