Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Jim West <jwest AT highland.net>]

Yitzhak Sapir wrote:
> First, I think it is anachronistic to use the term Judaism as applied to
> Samaritans, and perhaps even to Qumran.  

Fair enough.  "Judaisms" then.
> But beyond that, is there any evidence for more than one method of
> division?  

well yes there is.  unless we suppose that the author of genesis is also 
the author of exodus is also the author of leviticus and that he wrote 
them all out on one scroll and that example was followed from that time 
onward.  these books were, at some point, just single books or fragments 
of books, correct?  or are you suggesting that they were written in huge 
multi book chunks?  even given the length of the deuteronomistic history 
(a multi volume "work", if you will) it is so extensive that no one can 
suppose, can they, that it was originally a one scroll composition.

Only the 3-fold method in Qumran and the 5 fold method
> known from Qumran, modern Jewish tradition, as well as the
> Septuagint.  

positing ancient reality from fragmentary examples and modern practice 
seems a bit hazardous.  what we need is hard evidence.

> I have also received the following in reference to your mention of Tov's book 
> and the "five scrolls" from Carla Sulzbach:  "I checked my copy, and indeed, 
> on p. 4 he speaks of Five Megillot. However, that is in a section on the order 
> of the books in the "Hagiographa", the Ketuvim, and ... he does not refer to 
> Torah scrolls, five or any other number, but to Shir ha-Shirim, Ruth, Eicha, 
> etc."  I don't know.  In the Hebrew edition, he doesn't seem to discuss 
> methods of order of the books at all, at least not where I could see it, so 
> perhaps it is an addition in the English version.

Well whoever added it didnt do a very good job of being clear.

best

jim


--
Jim West, ThD

Biblical Studies Resources -  http://web.infoave.net/~jwest
Biblical Theology Weblog -  http://biblical-studies.blogspot.com