Why isn't the Tanakh and the Old Testament EXACTLY the same?

Question

Christians keep on saying that the Old Testament is the 'old law'.
But why isn't it exactly the same as the Tanakh, exept for the language?Why are today's christians scholars translating the Old Testament in accordance with the Tanakh?

If you look/read closely, you'll realise that although it appear to be the same, it is not.There are different,although not obvious, interpretation in the Bible.

Answer 1

That is more a question of translational bias on the part of the Christian translators of the Hebrew. And likewise to some degree on the part of the Jewish translators -- especially in regards to passages that might point someone to a particular Messiah. Notice for example the elimination of "Shiloh" from the Jewish Publication Society translation of Gen 49:10 even though the Artscroll maintains it.

One of the many problems Christians have is in the fact that they call these books "the old testament", when they don't have a passage (even in their "new testament") that calls this collection by that name. The "old covenant" which is being spoken of is the "covenant of sin and death" -- not a collection of books. They have misappropriated the words and misapplied them.

Beyond that, the Protestant "old testament" in Hebrew is exactly the same as the Tanakh.

Answer 2

Simple, in order to continue their religion, they must do one of two things - rewrite their copy or just tweek it enough to support their "new testament".

Since the Jews have held the Tanach long before the Christians came to be, rewriting it is difficult. Therefore all they can do is tweek it by translating various words so that it would appear to support their new testament.

You see, if Christians were to translate their old testament according to what the Tanach says in hebrew, they lose much of their prophecy and their basis for jesus being a god. They can't afford this.