Christians in particular will launch vitriolic claims against Jews based on misquotations from the Talmud. Here I will attempt to cover some of them so that you understand why they are wrong. Note, I almost never look at the Talmud but this claim in particular as well as others sometimes need to be addressed, especially if you're talking to someone like g.p., so here it is.
This section is set up to handle various specific claims which tend to be made uniquely by one or a small handful of denominations. Interestingly enough I've placed Muslim/Islam Claims here – not because they are of a class less than other Abrahamic religions, but preicsely because Islam is so close to what I believe as a Noachide there simply aren't very many Muslim claims I disagree with. Therefore as a matter of courtesy I will include them here, first, with a special introduction.
In particular we are interested in claims that denominations make of the bible which are not found in the bible in a simple and straightforward way. Our motto is Habakkuk 2:2;
And the LORD answered me, and said, Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it.Habakkuk 2:2 (KJV)
Also see documentary_hypothesis.
The documentary hypothesis ignores the actual text of the Bible in order to justify its claims. This is bad science and also reflects a bad understanding of Hebrew in the first place. for example, Genesis 2:4-5 clearly indicates that the so-called “second account of creation” is really just an in-depth examination of the events of the sixth day. And, it ignores the very clear hermeneutical principle of exposition; as so clearly shown in Genesis 10, 11 and 12, discussing different timelines and perspectives on the exact same historical period. To draw an analogy, shall we consider the Shemites listed in Genesis 10 (Table of Nations) to be a different genealogy than the one in Genesis 11? These same scholars will translate Genesis 10:11 to state that Cush built Nineveh, completely ignoring the presence of the person Ashur and the grammar ('went forth Ashur' vs. their misread 'went forth into Ashur'). Note that Ashur was the son of Shem, who would be in the same time and place as this same Assyria (h.Ashur) supposedly built by Cush the son of Ham. This is considered to be an incredible coincidence by these 'scholars' and they happily ignore it in order to mistranslate the Bible and mis-state what it says.
When you drill down to the core of the issue, the reason why the Documentary hypothesis exists is because be people promoting it do not want to believe in God, so they do not take the text itself as a reliable witness. The thought then is, since the text is not a reliable witness, any claim the text makes which cannot be directly proven is assumed to be 'false advertising'. I.E. if the Bible emphasizes the fact that Moses wrote the five books of the bible then that statement is proof that Moses did not write the five books of the Bible. This is not meant to sound derogatory but I know of no other way to say it. Once you become familiar with the actual text of the Bible (i.e. once you actually read it for understanding) the claims of the Documentary hypothesis begin to sound very trite. Below are a few examples of hard counters to the documentary hypothesis.
The Tanach was probably written down by Moses in 1445 B.C. 1 Kings 6:1 tells us that Solomon built the Temple in the fourth year of his reign over Israel:
And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel had come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the Lord1 Kings 6:1
Since the fourth year of Solomon's reign was about 966 B.C, we add 480 years before that to get a date of approximately 1445 BC (the wandering in the desert would have taken place after 1445 BC).
We also read in Judges:
While Israel dwelt in Heshbon and its villages, in Aroer and its villages, and in all the cities along the banks of Arnon, for three hundred years, why did you not recover them within that time?Judges 11:26
The statement that the people had been in the land for three hundred years fits with the date of the Exodus at 1445 B.C.
Therefore, according to the Bible itself, Moses wrote the Tanach around 1445 BC and that makes the bible (the Tanach) over 3,400 years old!
To those who then will discount these passages as suspect, we may point out that there is no reason to discount those passages in particular other than they give a date; i.e. we have no reason to assume they are lying. If these passages are then thrown out anyways, we can state that the people doing so have absolutely no belief that any verse in the Bible is accurate; they may in fact be studying a fairy tale. But, in such a case, why would someone devote their scholarly career to studying a document they believe to be entirely false? These scientists should be ashamed, for the very book they are studying states plainly the answer to their attacks.
From the Christian Bible as well, we find references:
A common charge is that Abraham (~1800 BC) had camels, which is impossible, because “scientific research” (ex. by Albright “the domestication of the camel cannot antedate the end of the 12th century B.C.” (1951, p. 207) see source from in quote below) shows camels had not been domesticated until, say, 1200 BC (or some similar later date). Point of fact, this is like saying there are no black swans because we have only observed white swans. Point of evidence,
A cylinder seal from Syria (c. 1800 B.C.) depicts two short figures riding a camel. Gordon and Rendsburg state, “The mention of camels here [in Genesis 24] and elsewhere in the patriarchal narratives often is considered anachronistic. However, the correctness of the Bible is supported by the representation of camel riding on seal cylinders of precisely this period from northern Mesopotamia (1997, p. 121). While the riders on the seal seem to be deities, it nevertheless demonstrates the concept of camel riding (for illustration and discussion, see Gordon, 1939, 6[1]:21; Collon, 2000, Fig. 8).Apologetics Press
http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?article=4800
In fact, figurines and even milk containers in the shape of Camels have been found at Egyptian sites dating back to 3,000 BC. There is nothing strange about camels in the Bible. The evidence goes on and on;
One of the first pieces of evidence for camel domestication comes from the site of Eshnunna in modern Iraq. A plaque from the mid-third millennium shows a camel being ridden by a human. Another source is a 21st-century-BCE text from Puzrish-Dagan in modern Iraq that may record camel deliveries. Third, an 18th-century text (quoting from an earlier third-millennium text) from Nippur in modern Iraq says, “the milk of the camel is sweet.”…Mosaic Magazine,
https://mosaicmagazine.com/picks/history-ideas/2018/11/yes-abraham-could-have-ridden-a-camel/
You can read more and see pictures of the inscriptions and other evidence at http://jandyongenesis.blogspot.com/2008/12/abrahams-camels.html
It cannot be underscored enough that the people making such claims against the Bible have not bothered to check the facts, or if they have they are being logically dishonest in their claims.
This is patently absurd. Chariot wheels have been found on sunken passkeys in the Red Sea which are thousands of years old. Then there are discoveries such as these;
As early as 1904 clearly Semitic proto-alphabetic inscriptions were found in the Sinai and dated to about 1600BC. In 1999 alphabetic inscriptions were found in Egypt combining hieroglyphs and alphabetic symbols dating to 1850BC.
Petrovich found he could translate many inscriptions if he used Hebrew as the Semitic language and found many references to biblical names and events, including Joseph’s son Manasseh and his son Shechem, and another to his wife Asenath. According to the book of Genesis, Joseph was the son of Jacob sold into slavery who rose to become second to Pharaoh in Egypt.
The most disputed inscription is one Petrovich claims may actually mention Moses and the biblical plagues. He translates it as: “Our bound servitude has lingered, Moses then provoked astonishment, it is the year of astonishment.”CPC,
https://www.publicchristianity.org/moses-write-torah/
However, in their typical scholarly arrogance, this evidence is marginalized and then ignored, often in the face of logic:
Other experts say the inscriptions are certainly proto-Canaanite and the ancestor of Semitic languages, including the paleo-Hebrew found from about 1050BC, but cannot be early Hebrew because they don’t believe Israelites existed so early.ibid
So, they can't be Hebrew (even though they read as Hebrew) because they don't believe they are Hebrew – They don't believe the stories in the Bible could possibly be true, and have therefore concluded (using such circular evidence) that Israelites could not really have existed at such an early time period! This is the logic of the Documentary Hypothesis “bible scholars” laid plain.