b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
- From: "Bill Ross" <BillRoss AT norisksoftware.com>
- To: "Jonathan D. Safren" <yonsaf AT beitberl.ac.il>, "Biblical Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT franklin.metalab.unc.edu>
- Subject: RE: The OT?
- Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 10:20:38 -0500
<Jonathon>
>>The Jewish Bible, or Tanakh, or Hebrew Bible, is not identical with
the Christian Old Testament.
<Bill>
While some have complained that this thread is pointless, I do find it
quite educational, and am grateful for the comments.
It is very obvious that there is no concensus on what constitutes the
"OT" among christians. Is there concensus among Jews as to what
constitutes the Hebrew bible? I thought that when the christian canons
were formed, the Hebrew bible ended with 2 Chronicles. Is that not true?
What, if any, are the main strains of consensus concerning the Hebrew
canon, and is it considered "canon" or "rule" or is it only the
covenant, or Torah (Gen-Deut) that constitute the commandments?
<Jonathon>
>>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.
<Bill>
As I muse on this, the christian scriptures uniformly apply the
appellation "the scriptures" or "the writings" to the Hebrew bible,
along with "the law and prophets" and the "older treasure" [OT], and
never even give a name to any newer collection [which did not exist,
obviously].
Also, the only "older treasure" which is specifically referred to as
"inspired" is the LXX, since Paul, writing to Timotheus, a Greek, said,
"from a child you have known the holy scriptures...all scripture is
inspired by G-d"...
I believe that it was customary among the "church fathers" [early
christians] to refer to the "NT" as "the gospel."
So, perhaps the most internally consistent designations for christians
to make, that in turn reflect the historic Jewish stone from which they
were hewn, is "the writings" or "[holy] scriptures" and "the gospel," or
alternatively, "OT" and "NT" for "Older Treasure" and "New Treasure."
The Tanach refers specifically to the Hebrew bible as recognized today,
and specifically to the version in the certain order, etc. How long has
this been the recognized "canon?"
But let's all pleeeaasse lose the ridiculous word "testament!"
Bill Ross
-
Re: The OT?
, (continued)
- Re: The OT?, Shoshanna Walker, 08/24/2002
- RE: The OT?, Dave Washburn, 08/24/2002
- RE: The OT?, Bill Ross, 08/24/2002
- Re: The OT?, Shoshanna Walker, 08/25/2002
- RE: The OT?, Shoshanna Walker, 08/25/2002
- RE: The OT?, Dave Washburn, 08/25/2002
- RE: The OT?, Shoshanna Walker, 08/25/2002
- Re: The OT?, Jonathan D. Safren, 08/25/2002
- Re: The OT?, Jonathan D. Safren, 08/25/2002
- The OT?, JwReform, 08/25/2002
-
RE: The OT?,
Bill Ross, 08/25/2002
- Re: The OT?, Jonathan D. Safren, 08/25/2002
-
Message not available
- Re: The OT? - evidence for canon of Hebrew Scriptures by DSS and Josephus, Schmuel, 08/25/2002
-
Message not available
- Re: The OT?, Yigal Levin, 08/26/2002
-
Message not available
- Re: The OT? - evidence for canon of Hebrew Scriptures by DSS and Josephus, Jonathan D. Safren, 08/26/2002
- RE: The OT?, Moshe Shulman, 08/25/2002
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.