[b-hebrew] Tanach book order - different in Christian Bibles
hholmyard at ont.com
Fri Sep 1 14:12:31 EDT 2006
>I am new on this list, my name is Philippe Wajdenbaum; I have been following
>the discussions for about a week or so. As Daniel seems to be a subject; I
>think that Jewish authorities did not consider him as a prophet because he
>spoke about an embarassing period of time, wich is the time of the
>Hasmoneans. Either you believe in his abilty to predict future, either you
>admit the book was written after the facts. In the book of Daniel, in
>Hebrew, the orchestra of Nabuchodonosor is made of Greek instruments:
>psalterion, caitharis and sumphonia (Dn. 3:5).
HH: Greek words and culture were known during the Persian period. It is
not necessary to draw any conclusions on that basis.
>For this period is embarassing, the books of Maccabees were rejected -or
>never injected- in the Tanakh. Why would the hellenistic period be
>embarassing for Jewish authorities?
HH: My understanding is that the Apocrypha were not accepted into the
canon for at least two other reasons:
1) Israel believed that the succession of the prophets stopped with Malachi
2) Israel only accepted Hebrew or Aramaic texts into the canon.
> I think that early discussions from this
>board in the year 2000, have the answer. The whole Tanakh was written in the
>hellenistic period, I 'am afraid, like Thomas L. Thompson and Niels Peter
>Lemche claim it.
>By the way, Sanhedrin comes from Greek Sunedrion, so if there ever was a
>Sanhedrin before that period, it must have had another name.
HH: The two men you mention have had a deadening disbelief that they
want to pass on to others. Don't fall victim to a theory that would deny
to Israel its ancient history and to Christians the historical
foundations of their faith. Their schemes make the Old Testament a
misrepresentation of reality. They are like the Holocaust deniers, only
they take things a step farther. They take God's glory through history
away from Israel.
More information about the b-hebrew