Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: The OT?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Jonathan D. Safren" <yonsaf AT beitberl.ac.il>
  • To: "Bill Ross" <BillRoss AT norisksoftware.com>, "Biblical Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT franklin.metalab.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: The OT?
  • Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 10:16:12 +0200

The Jewish Bible, or Tanakh, or Hebrew Bible, is not identical with the Christian Old Testament. The order of the books is different in each; the tripartite divison of the Tanakh is lacking in the Old Testament, in which the prophetic books come at the end, so as to lead up to the birth of Jesus.
(Several years ago I downloaded an article, I forgot by whomm as I have erased it on this computer, outlining the theological and structural differences between the Jewish and Christian Bibles, and suggesting, if my memory serves me right - which it often doesn't - the names First and Second Testament.)
So, although Jewish and Christian scholars may be talking about two similar colllections of books and the same individual books, I feel it would be best to specify which Bible is being referred to, especially when the order of books makes a difference.
Sincerely,
Jonathan D. Safren
Department of Biblical Studies
Beit Berl College
44905 Beit Berl Post Office
Israel
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Ross
Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2002 5:10 AM
Subject: RE: The OT?

<Shoshanna>
>>How about Jewish Bible and Christian Bible?  Isn't that the most
correct?

<Bill>
The problem is that christians recognize both libraries, so Genesis is
in both the Jewish and christian bibles.

>>See? According to Jesus, the treasure is not found in one part, but
both.

<Shoshanna>
>>But Jesus is not our authority

<Bill>
For those who claim that Jesus is their authority, the OT/NT designation
would be appropriate, while the term "old testament" is just a 1611-type
tradition that should be shed.

It seems to me that the term "old things" if taken from a context of
being recognized as an abiding treasure, is not an intrinsically
offensive, at least crassly offensive designation.

In other words, if I say that some of my wine is old and some is new, it
doesn't insult the older wine, while it distinguishes it.

Now I am not saying that the christian position of a *superior* covenant
is thereby taken away, but the documents are put in a perspective that
is consistent with the christian scriptures themselves.

Bottom line: call them what you want, but the term "testament" is an
inapropriate one by any measure. [Or is the Tanach a "testament?!"]

Bill Ross



---
You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: [yonsaf AT beitberl.ac.il]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-hebrew-101906J AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page