| Line 3: |
Line 3: |
| | {{Bible}} | | {{Bible}} |
| | <center>''For a collection of fascinating entries about the Bible, see [[:Category:Conservative Bible|here]]''.</center> | | <center>''For a collection of fascinating entries about the Bible, see [[:Category:Conservative Bible|here]]''.</center> |
| − | The '''Bible''' is the most [[logic]]al, insightful and influential collection of writings in history. It includes much that is both profound and beautiful. [[Biblical scientific foreknowledge]] has predicted or guided most human achievement. The Bible is great literature and the source of many common phrases,<ref name=LiteraryCriticism>See [[Historical-critical method (Higher criticism)]], in particular the findings of the following supportive sources of literary criticism:: | + | The '''Bible''' is the most [[logic]]al, insightful and influential collection of writings in history. It includes much that is both profound and beautiful. [[Biblical scientific foreknowledge]] has predicted or guided most human achievements. The Bible is great literature and the source of many common phrases,<ref name=LiteraryCriticism>See [[Historical-critical method (Higher criticism)]], in particular the findings of the following supportive sources of literary criticism:: |
| | *The Bible’s message is both ‘divine’ and ‘human’.<br/>—[http://www.saintjohnsabbey.org/liturgy-answers/bibles-message-both-divine-and-human/ St. John's Abbey: ''The Bible’s message is both ‘divine’ and ‘human’.'' Friday, January 17th, 2014, Benedictine Father Michael Kwatera, a monk of St. John’s Abbey in Collegeville, MN.] | | *The Bible’s message is both ‘divine’ and ‘human’.<br/>—[http://www.saintjohnsabbey.org/liturgy-answers/bibles-message-both-divine-and-human/ St. John's Abbey: ''The Bible’s message is both ‘divine’ and ‘human’.'' Friday, January 17th, 2014, Benedictine Father Michael Kwatera, a monk of St. John’s Abbey in Collegeville, MN.] |
| | *The more conservative theologians who employ the historical-critical method believe that the Scriptures are more than the writings of mortal men.<br/>—[http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BeckerHistorical.pdf The Historical-Critical Method of Bible Interpretation, By Siegbert W. Becker], page 4. | | *The more conservative theologians who employ the historical-critical method believe that the Scriptures are more than the writings of mortal men.<br/>—[http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BeckerHistorical.pdf The Historical-Critical Method of Bible Interpretation, By Siegbert W. Becker], page 4. |
| Line 10: |
Line 10: |
| | The bestselling book in history, the Bible is a testament to its timeless and compelling message.<ref>The Bible continues to be the best-selling book ever. Americans alone buy 25 million Bibles a year, according to Publisher's Weekly. Bible sales are now reaching $609 million a year, with specialty Bibles available for myriad "niche" audiences, from motorcycle riders to campers, brides and archaeologists. "Immerse," a water-resistant Bible for troops overseas, is now available from publisher Bardin & Marsee. [http://www.washtimes.com/national/20070529-111815-7952r.htm Polls: Most believe Bible as God's word] - Jennifer Harper, ''The Washington Times'' - May 30, 2007</ref> In addition, it has had an invaluable, positive influence on literature, culture, and history. According to the Guinness World Records, "A survey by the Bible Society concluded that around 2.5 billion copies [of the Bible] were printed between 1815 and 1975, but more recent estimates put the number at more than 5 billion."<ref>[http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/best-selling-book-of-non-fiction/ Best-selling book of non-fiction], Guinness World Records</ref> | | The bestselling book in history, the Bible is a testament to its timeless and compelling message.<ref>The Bible continues to be the best-selling book ever. Americans alone buy 25 million Bibles a year, according to Publisher's Weekly. Bible sales are now reaching $609 million a year, with specialty Bibles available for myriad "niche" audiences, from motorcycle riders to campers, brides and archaeologists. "Immerse," a water-resistant Bible for troops overseas, is now available from publisher Bardin & Marsee. [http://www.washtimes.com/national/20070529-111815-7952r.htm Polls: Most believe Bible as God's word] - Jennifer Harper, ''The Washington Times'' - May 30, 2007</ref> In addition, it has had an invaluable, positive influence on literature, culture, and history. According to the Guinness World Records, "A survey by the Bible Society concluded that around 2.5 billion copies [of the Bible] were printed between 1815 and 1975, but more recent estimates put the number at more than 5 billion."<ref>[http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/best-selling-book-of-non-fiction/ Best-selling book of non-fiction], Guinness World Records</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | The Bible consists of two parts: 27 short books and letters of the [[New Testament]] of the [[Christian]] [[faith]], and 39 Hebrew and Aramaic books recognized by both Christianity and Judaism, which are included among the collection of 46 writings known as the [[Old Testament]]. The text of the Old Testament was originally written in [[Hebrew]] and [[Aramaic]], and was later translated and expanded in [[Greek]] by rabbinical scholars in the [[Septuagint]] Bible of the Greek-speaking Jews which was the Bible of the [[Apostles]].<ref>"Bible of the apostles". See the following four sources: | + | The Bible consists of two parts: 27 short books and letters of the [[New Testament]] of the [[Christian]] [[faith]], and 39 Hebrew and Aramaic books recognized by both Christianity and Judaism, which are included among the collection of 46 writings known as the [[Old Testament]]. The text of the Old Testament was originally written in [[Hebrew]] and [[Aramaic]] and was later translated and expanded in [[Greek]] by rabbinical scholars in the [[Septuagint]] Bible of the Greek-speaking Jews which was the Bible of the [[Apostles]].<ref>"Bible of the apostles". See the following four sources: |
| | *[http://www.scripturecatholic.com/septuagint.html Septuagint Quotes in the New Testament] | | *[http://www.scripturecatholic.com/septuagint.html Septuagint Quotes in the New Testament] |
| | *[http://setterfield.org/Septuagint_History.html The Alexandrian Septuagint History - Barry Setterfield (setterfield.org)] | | *[http://setterfield.org/Septuagint_History.html The Alexandrian Septuagint History - Barry Setterfield (setterfield.org)] |
| Line 25: |
Line 25: |
| | Between 5 to 7 billion Bibles have been published. ]] | | Between 5 to 7 billion Bibles have been published. ]] |
| | {{See also|The Gospel}} | | {{See also|The Gospel}} |
| − | The Bible is the most ancient collective document of writings in antiquity witnessing to the revelation of the one living God to the community of the people he has chosen and formed to be his priests and witnesses to all the peoples of the earth. This people chosen and called out from every nation and language on earth testifies that God is one being of three Persons, Father, Son, Holy Spirit, who loves all that he has created, and that there is nothing in all the whole created universe that he did not create through the power of his Word. The Bible is the collective testimony of this community of people chosen out of all the peoples of the earth that God is the one original cause of all existence, creator of the universe and all that it contains both visible and invisible. They have borne witness in the several sacred scriptures contained in the Bible that this one unique God has acted and continues to act in history.<ref>Chaffey, Tim (April 1, 2011). [https://answersingenesis.org/the-word-of-god/3-unity-of-the-bible/ 3. Unity of the Bible]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved April 21, 2019.</ref><ref>Lisle, Jason (March 22, 2011). [https://answersingenesis.org/is-the-bible-true/how-do-we-know-that-the-bible-is-true/ How Do We Know that the Bible Is True?] ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved April 21, 2019.</ref><ref>Cheffey, Tim (February 22, 2017). [https://answersingenesis.org/is-the-bible-true/3-evidences-confirm-bible-not-made-up/ 3 Evidences That Confirm the Bible Is Not Made Up]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved April 21, 2019.</ref><ref>[https://www.josh.org/resurrection/bible-is-unique/ Bible is Unique]. ''Josh McDowell Ministry''. Retrieved April 21, 2019.</ref> | + | The Bible is the most ancient collective document of writings in antiquity witnessing to the revelation of the one living God to the community of the people he has chosen and formed to be his priests and witnesses to all the peoples of the earth. These people chosen and called out from every nation and language on earth testifies that God is one being of three Persons, Father, Son, Holy Spirit, who loves all that he has created, and that there is nothing in all the whole created universe that he did not create through the power of his Word. The Bible is the collective testimony of this community of people chosen out of all the peoples of the earth that God is the one original cause of all existence, creator of the universe and all that it contains both visible and invisible. They have borne witness in the several sacred scriptures contained in the Bible that this one unique God has acted and continues to act in history.<ref>Chaffey, Tim (April 1, 2011). [https://answersingenesis.org/the-word-of-god/3-unity-of-the-bible/ 3. Unity of the Bible]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved April 21, 2019.</ref><ref>Lisle, Jason (March 22, 2011). [https://answersingenesis.org/is-the-bible-true/how-do-we-know-that-the-bible-is-true/ How Do We Know that the Bible Is True?] ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved April 21, 2019.</ref><ref>Cheffey, Tim (February 22, 2017). [https://answersingenesis.org/is-the-bible-true/3-evidences-confirm-bible-not-made-up/ 3 Evidences That Confirm the Bible Is Not Made Up]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved April 21, 2019.</ref><ref>[https://www.josh.org/resurrection/bible-is-unique/ Bible is Unique]. ''Josh McDowell Ministry''. Retrieved April 21, 2019.</ref> |
| | | | |
| | The Bible is unique in antiquity in its witness that God has made one of his creations, the whole human race, to be above the physical animal nature of the body and be like himself with dominion over the whole earth and all its creatures. The Bible testifies that God himself has called this human creature, male and female, to a personal relationship with him as a whole community of love and goodness and mercy in his image as his living temple and dwelling place on earth and to give evidence of his reality and to acknowledge him in all they do and say. | | The Bible is unique in antiquity in its witness that God has made one of his creations, the whole human race, to be above the physical animal nature of the body and be like himself with dominion over the whole earth and all its creatures. The Bible testifies that God himself has called this human creature, male and female, to a personal relationship with him as a whole community of love and goodness and mercy in his image as his living temple and dwelling place on earth and to give evidence of his reality and to acknowledge him in all they do and say. |
| Line 37: |
Line 37: |
| | But just as Jesus has appeared to many to be no more than an ordinary human being, and just as Christianity has appeared to many to be no more than a merely human institution of religion, so the Bible also has appeared to many to be no more than a traditional collection of ordinary human literature. However, even the tools of [[Historical-critical method (Higher criticism)|ordinary literary criticism]] have clearly shown the Bible to be more than a collection of merely human literature, and its scriptures to be much more than ordinary human writings.<ref name=LiteraryCriticism/> | | But just as Jesus has appeared to many to be no more than an ordinary human being, and just as Christianity has appeared to many to be no more than a merely human institution of religion, so the Bible also has appeared to many to be no more than a traditional collection of ordinary human literature. However, even the tools of [[Historical-critical method (Higher criticism)|ordinary literary criticism]] have clearly shown the Bible to be more than a collection of merely human literature, and its scriptures to be much more than ordinary human writings.<ref name=LiteraryCriticism/> |
| | | | |
| − | The Bible and was studied extensively by the greatest modern thinkers, including [[Isaac Newton]], [[Louis Pasteur]], [[Bernhard Riemann]], [[Thomas Jefferson]], [[Alexander Hamilton]], [[Georg Cantor]], [[John von Neumann]], and [[Kurt Godel]]. | + | The Bible was studied extensively by the greatest modern thinkers, including [[Isaac Newton]], [[Louis Pasteur]], [[Bernhard Riemann]], [[Thomas Jefferson]], [[Alexander Hamilton]], [[Georg Cantor]], [[John von Neumann]], and [[Kurt Godel]]. |
| | | | |
| | ==Books of the Bible== | | ==Books of the Bible== |
| Line 48: |
Line 48: |
| | # 2nd Maccabees | | # 2nd Maccabees |
| | # Baruch [http://www.catholicbible101.com/theholybible.htm] | | # Baruch [http://www.catholicbible101.com/theholybible.htm] |
| − | The Orthodox Greek Bible since the 1st century has always included Psalm 151 as appended to Psalm 150, and the Third Book of the Maccabees, and, in an appendix to the Old Testament, the Fourth Book of the Maccabees, a treatise on the superiority of wisdom. These were never included among the Protestant Apocrypha in the 16th century—but they also have never been included among the books of the Old Testament in Protestant Bibles. Martin Luther and the leaders of the Reformation did not address their canonical status, and did not discuss them. The Book of 1 Esdras has always been included in the Orthodox Bible among the Historical Books between 2 Chronicles and Ezra, but is regarded since the Council of Trent by both Catholics and Protestants as non-canonical and apocryphal and is not included by them in the Old Testament. The Latin apocalyptic 2 Esdras, which was never part of the Greek Old Testament, but was included in the Vulgate, is not included in the canon of standard Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant Bibles, and is included with 1 Esdras and Prayer of Manasseh in the Protestant Apocrypha. The same 2 Esdras is included as ''Ezra Sutuel'' in the canon of the Ethiopic Bible of the [[Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church|Orthodox Ethiopian Church]], which as a whole differs both in the Old and New Testament from that of any other churches. The Ethiopic canonical books, written in the [[Geez language]] and on parchment, are numerous. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church has 46 books of the Old Testament and 35 books of the New Testament, bringing the total of canonized books of the Ethiopian Orthodox Bible to 81. The canon of the Ethiopic Bible appears to date back to the 5th century. See [https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1292150/Worlds-illustrated-Christian-bible-discovered-Ethiopian-monastery.html World's first illustrated Christian bible discovered at Ethiopian monastery, By Daily Mail Reporter. Updated: 11:33 EST, 5 July 2010] Carbon dating gives a date between 330 and 650.</ref> The English King James Version of the Protestant Bible has 593,493 words in the Old Testament and 181,253 words in the New Testament.<ref>[http://www.christiananswers.net/bible/about.html ChristianAnswers.Net. About the Bible] (christiananswers.net)</ref> | + | The Orthodox Greek Bible since the 1st century has always included Psalm 151 as appended to Psalm 150, and the Third Book of the Maccabees, and, in an appendix to the Old Testament, the Fourth Book of the Maccabees, a treatise on the superiority of wisdom. These were never included among the Protestant Apocrypha in the 16th century—but they also have never been included among the books of the Old Testament in Protestant Bibles. Martin Luther and the leaders of the Reformation did not address their canonical status and did not discuss them. The Book of 1 Esdras has always been included in the Orthodox Bible among the Historical Books between 2 Chronicles and Ezra, but is regarded since the Council of Trent by both Catholics and Protestants as non-canonical and apocryphal and is not included by them in the Old Testament. The Latin apocalyptic 2 Esdras, which was never part of the Greek Old Testament, but was included in the Vulgate, is not included in the canon of standard Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant Bibles, and is included with 1 Esdras and Prayer of Manasseh in the Protestant Apocrypha. The same 2 Esdras is included as ''Ezra Sutuel'' in the canon of the Ethiopic Bible of the [[Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church|Orthodox Ethiopian Church]], which as a whole differs both in the Old and New Testament from that of any other churches. The Ethiopic canonical books, written in the [[Geez language]] and on parchment, are numerous. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church has 46 books of the Old Testament and 35 books of the New Testament, bringing the total of canonized books of the Ethiopian Orthodox Bible to 81. The canon of the Ethiopic Bible appears to date back to the 5th century. See [https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1292150/Worlds-illustrated-Christian-bible-discovered-Ethiopian-monastery.html World's first illustrated Christian bible discovered at Ethiopian monastery, By Daily Mail Reporter. Updated: 11:33 EST, 5 July 2010] Carbon dating gives a date between 330 and 650.</ref> The English King James Version of the Protestant Bible has 593,493 words in the Old Testament and 181,253 words in the New Testament.<ref>[http://www.christiananswers.net/bible/about.html ChristianAnswers.Net. About the Bible] (christiananswers.net)</ref> |
| | | | |
| | ===The Old Testament=== | | ===The Old Testament=== |
| Line 271: |
Line 271: |
| | Biblical researchers in the 20th and 21st centuries have also discovered manuscripts and linguistic evidence that appear to prove that most of the Apocrypha, except the Book of Wisdom (originally written in Greek?), were originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic (Syriac) prior to the Christian era. <br/>[http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/apocrypha/ Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology - Apocrypha] <br/>[http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/apocrypha.html The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha] (jewishvirtuallibrary.org)</ref> Melito,<ref>[http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=1017 Catholic Online: St. Melito of Sardis], [http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/melito.html Early Christian Writings: Melito of Sardis]</ref> a bishop of [[Sardis]] in [[Lydia]] (in what is now [[Turkey]]), is said to have coined the phrase ''Old Testament'' about A.D. 170. The Greek Old Testament has been a continuous part of the Christian Bible in the eastern Churches in Palestine, Greece, Turkey, and the whole of the [[Levant]] since the 1st century. | | Biblical researchers in the 20th and 21st centuries have also discovered manuscripts and linguistic evidence that appear to prove that most of the Apocrypha, except the Book of Wisdom (originally written in Greek?), were originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic (Syriac) prior to the Christian era. <br/>[http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/apocrypha/ Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology - Apocrypha] <br/>[http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/apocrypha.html The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha] (jewishvirtuallibrary.org)</ref> Melito,<ref>[http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=1017 Catholic Online: St. Melito of Sardis], [http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/melito.html Early Christian Writings: Melito of Sardis]</ref> a bishop of [[Sardis]] in [[Lydia]] (in what is now [[Turkey]]), is said to have coined the phrase ''Old Testament'' about A.D. 170. The Greek Old Testament has been a continuous part of the Christian Bible in the eastern Churches in Palestine, Greece, Turkey, and the whole of the [[Levant]] since the 1st century. |
| | | | |
| − | The Hebrew Old Testament is divided in three parts within the Jewish community: the [[Torah|'''T'''orah]] ("Law"), or [[Pentateuch]], the five books of [[Moses]]; the Nevi'im'''N'''evi'im]] ("Prophets"), and the Ketuvim ("Writings,” or Hagiographa) (abbreviated '''T'''a'''N'''a'''K'''h, hence, "Tanakh", ). Here the arrangement of the books differs somewhat from the Old Testament as used by Christians, with three of the twenty-four (Samuel, Kings, Chronicles) each being divided into two books, and Ezra being divided into Ezra and Nehemiah; however the actual writing of each book remains the same. The Christian order of the books of the Bible follows the Chronology of the events and the personages being related, according to their arrangement in the Septuagint, while in the Jewish order, though there is a chronological framework, the order follows more the importance, influence, "weight of usage" within Judaism. Thus, for orthodox Judaism, The Torah of [[Moses]] comes first (the 5 books of Moses), and is the most authoritative of all Scripture. Under the [[Pharisee|Pharasaic]] theory that Moses was also given the Oral law, explicating how the Written law was to be applied, at the same time as he was given the written law contained in the Bible, the Oral Law too was passed on through the generations, and was later in A.D. the 3rd century first put into writing in the Mishna (compiled by Judah haNasi <ref>[http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/hanasi.html Yehudah HaNasi (Judah the Prince) (A.D. 135 - 219)], [http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8963-judah-i Jewish Encyclopedia: Judah I]</ref>) and the Gemara (gathered by the Amoriam <ref>Amoraim (Aramaic: plural אמוראים [ʔamoʁaˈʔim], singular Amora אמורא [ʔamoˈʁa]; "those who say" or "those who speak over the people", or "spokesmen"), were renowned Jewish scholars who "said" or "told over" the teachings of the Oral Torah, from about 200 to 500 CE in Babylonia and the Land of Israel. See [http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0002_0_01018.html Jewish Virtual Library: AMORAIM]</ref>) finally composing the [[Talmud]], and is regarded as equally authoritative with the Torah of Moses.<ref>There is a similar teaching in the Christian New Testament, in the Second Letter to the Thessalonians ([http://biblehub.com/multi/2_thessalonians/2-15.htm 2:15]) and in the First Letter to the Corinthians ([http://biblehub.com/multi/1_corinthians/11-2.htm 11:2]). This seems to be the Biblical justification for the Catholic and Orthodox teaching that the fullness of the Christian faith is contained in both scripture and tradition, "letter" and "word". See [[Sola scriptura]]</ref> Then the Prophets come next in authority. But the category of the Hebrew Prophets for the Jews is much broader than the category of the Prophets as considered by the Christian ordering. The "Prophets" in the Tanakh includes what Christians consider "History" - such as the books of the Kings - but it also includes what Christians call the Former and the Latter, or the Major and the Minor prophets. The last in authority for every day life of the Jew, in terms of "regulation", actually form a great influence in the Synagogue worship - the Writings, with a heavy emphasis on the Psalms. | + | The Hebrew Old Testament is divided in three parts within the Jewish community: the [[Torah|'''T'''orah]] ("Law"), or [[Pentateuch]], the five books of [[Moses]]; the Nevi'im'''N'''evi'im]] ("Prophets"), and the Ketuvim ("Writings,” or Hagiographa) (abbreviated '''T'''a'''N'''a'''K'''h, hence, "Tanakh", ). Here the arrangement of the books differs somewhat from the Old Testament as used by Christians, with three of the twenty-four (Samuel, Kings, Chronicles) each being divided into two books, and Ezra being divided into Ezra and Nehemiah; however, the actual writing of each book remains the same. The Christian order of the books of the Bible follows the Chronology of the events and the personages being related, according to their arrangement in the Septuagint, while in the Jewish order, though there is a chronological framework, the order follows more the importance, influence, "weight of usage" within Judaism. Thus, for orthodox Judaism, The Torah of [[Moses]] comes first (the 5 books of Moses), and is the most authoritative of all Scripture. Under the [[Pharisee|Pharasaic]] theory that Moses was also given the Oral law, explicating how the Written law was to be applied, at the same time as he was given the written law contained in the Bible, the Oral Law too was passed on through the generations, and was later in A.D. the 3rd century first put into writing in the Mishna (compiled by Judah haNasi <ref>[http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/hanasi.html Yehudah HaNasi (Judah the Prince) (A.D. 135 - 219)], [http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8963-judah-i Jewish Encyclopedia: Judah I]</ref>) and the Gemara (gathered by the Amoriam <ref>Amoraim (Aramaic: plural אמוראים [ʔamoʁaˈʔim], singular Amora אמורא [ʔamoˈʁa]; "those who say" or "those who speak over the people", or "spokesmen"), were renowned Jewish scholars who "said" or "told over" the teachings of the Oral Torah, from about 200 to 500 CE in Babylonia and the Land of Israel. See [http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0002_0_01018.html Jewish Virtual Library: AMORAIM]</ref>) finally composing the [[Talmud]], and is regarded as equally authoritative with the Torah of Moses.<ref>There is similar teaching in the Christian New Testament, in the Second Letter to the Thessalonians ([http://biblehub.com/multi/2_thessalonians/2-15.htm 2:15]) and in the First Letter to the Corinthians ([http://biblehub.com/multi/1_corinthians/11-2.htm 11:2]). This seems to be the Biblical justification for the Catholic and Orthodox teaching that the fullness of the Christian faith is contained in both scripture and tradition, "letter" and "word". See [[Sola scriptura]]</ref> Then the Prophets come next in authority. But the category of the Hebrew Prophets for the Jews is much broader than the category of the Prophets as considered by the Christian ordering. The "Prophets" in the Tanakh include what Christians consider "History" - such as the books of the Kings - but it also includes what Christians call the Former and the Latter, or the Major and the Minor prophets. The last in authority for the everyday life of the Jew, in terms of "regulation", actually form a great influence in the Synagogue worship - the Writings, with a heavy emphasis on the Psalms. |
| | | | |
| | ====Torah==== | | ====Torah==== |
| Line 287: |
Line 287: |
| | | | |
| | ====Nevi'im==== | | ====Nevi'im==== |
| − | The Nevi'im ("Prophets") is the story of the rise toward, and ultimately reaching, the Hebrew monarchy; the sad period of anarchy and revolt leading to the division into the two kingdoms of Judah and Israel; and the prophets who judged the kings of both in God's name. It ends with the conquest and dissolution of the Northern Kingdom of Israel and its Assyrian exile, and then the conquest of the Kingdom of Judah, the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, and the Babylonian exile. The Minor Prophets are considered a single book in the Nevi'im; in Christianity they have been split into twelve separate books and named for their authors. | + | The Nevi'im ("Prophets") is the story of the rise toward, and ultimately reaching the Hebrew monarchy; the sad period of anarchy and revolt leading to the division into the two kingdoms of Judah and Israel; and the prophets who judged the kings of both in God's name. It ends with the conquest and dissolution of the Northern Kingdom of Israel and its Assyrian exile, and then the conquest of the Kingdom of Judah, the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, and the Babylonian exile. The Minor Prophets are considered a single book in the Nevi'im; in Christianity they have been split into twelve separate books and named for their authors. |
| | *<big>יְהוֹשֻׁעַ</big> [[Joshua (Biblical book)|Joshua]] | | *<big>יְהוֹשֻׁעַ</big> [[Joshua (Biblical book)|Joshua]] |
| | *<big>שׁוֹפְטִים</big> [[Judges (Biblical book)|Judges]] | | *<big>שׁוֹפְטִים</big> [[Judges (Biblical book)|Judges]] |
| Line 325: |
Line 325: |
| | *<big>דִּבְרֵי הַיָּמִים א</big> <small>''and''</small> <big>דִּבְרֵי הַיָּמִים ב</big> [[1 Chronicles|First]] and [[2 Chronicles|Second Chronicles]]. | | *<big>דִּבְרֵי הַיָּמִים א</big> <small>''and''</small> <big>דִּבְרֵי הַיָּמִים ב</big> [[1 Chronicles|First]] and [[2 Chronicles|Second Chronicles]]. |
| | | | |
| − | [[David]] has been named as the author of the ''Psalms''; [[Solomon]] is traditionally believed to have written ''Song of Songs'' in his youth, the ''Proverbs'' in his prime, and ''Ecclesiastes'' during his old age. The prophet [[Jeremiah]] is thought to have written the aptly-named ''Lamentations'' at the beginning of the exile to Babylon. The ''Book of Ruth'' is the only biblical book that centers entirely on a non-Jew, a [[Moabite]] who married a Jew and became an ancestor of both David and [[Jesus Christ]]. ''Esther'' is unique as it is the only book in the Hebrew Tanakh not to mention God. Moses is traditionally considered to be the author of ''Job''. | + | [[David]] has been named as the author of the ''Psalms''; [[Solomon]] is traditionally believed to have written ''Song of Songs'' in his youth, the ''Proverbs'' in his prime, and ''Ecclesiastes'' during his old age. The prophet [[Jeremiah]] is thought to have written the aptly named ''Lamentations'' at the beginning of the exile to Babylon. The ''Book of Ruth'' is the only biblical book that centers entirely on a non-Jew, a [[Moabite]] who married a Jew and became an ancestor of both David and [[Jesus Christ]]. ''Esther'' is unique as it is the only book in the Hebrew Tanakh not to mention God. Moses is traditionally considered to be the author of ''Job''. |
| | | | |
| | ===The melodies of the Old Testament=== | | ===The melodies of the Old Testament=== |
| − | The Hebrew of the present day Old Testament is composed of the Hebrew consonants and, added on by the [[Masoretic Text|Masoretes]] at a later stage, the vowels. Along with these two elements, other signs were added which indicated the melodies that were sung along with the words or phrases. Some of the signs were positioned above the individual consonants, some below, and some to the side. Some of these melody signs were associated with others providing a musical pattern that corresponds with the opening of a thought, similar to the beginning of a sentence (ex. "merkha"), the continuation of a thought (ex. "munakh"), tying in one word with the following, as one melody flowed into the next, the "resting" or completion of a thought, much in "the same way that a comma (ex. "azla"), though not ending a sentence, makes for the "semi"-ending or minor completion of a thought, a major break in the run of thoughts ("etnachta"), though the run of thought would be resumed until the major completion ("sof pasuq"), much in the same way the a period brings to a stop and a completion as a sentence ends. Thus the musical signs in the Hebrew text also provide an interpretation of the text current to the times in which the signs were incorporated as part of the text, the Masoretic vowel-pointing excluding those former tonal readings which clearly represented Christian textual interpretations. The signs that tie one word to another providing one thought are called "conjunctive" signs and the signs that separate words and the thought of them are called "disjunctive". An example of the use of these signs to interpret the Hebrew text is the well known prophesy of the One to come. The Hebrew letters can either be understood to read "His name shall be called Wonderful counsellor of (''from, sent by, representing'') the mighty God", or "His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God". The melody signs (called in Hebrew "Ta'mei HaMikra) decide for the latter. After "Wonderful" there is a disjunctive, after "Counsellor" there is a disjunctive, and after "Mighty" (but adj. after the noun in Hebrew order) there is a conjunctive. It is possible to reconstruct to some extent the melody and the interpretation of the Old Testament current in the first century and therefore the melody and the interpretation used by Jesus Himself.<ref name=Steinberg>[http://www.adath-shalom.ca/history_of_hebrew2a.htm History of the Ancient and Modern Hebrew Language, By David Steinberg. Phonemic Structure of Hebrew]<br/> David.Steinberg@houseofdavid.ca. http://www.houseofdavid.ca Home page | + | The Hebrew of the present-day Old Testament is composed of the Hebrew consonants and, added on by the [[Masoretic Text|Masoretes]] at a later stage, the vowels. Along with these two elements, other signs were added which indicated the melodies that were sung along with the words or phrases. Some of the signs were positioned above the individual consonants, some below, and some to the side. Some of these melody signs were associated with others providing a musical pattern that corresponds with the opening of a thought, similar to the beginning of a sentence (ex. "merkha"), the continuation of a thought (ex. "munakh"), tying in one word with the following, as one melody flowed into the next, the "resting" or completion of a thought, much in "the same way that a comma (ex. "azla"), though not ending a sentence, makes for the "semi"-ending or minor completion of a thought, a major break in the run of thoughts ("etnachta"), though the run of thought would be resumed until the major completion ("sof pasuq"), much in the same way the period brings to a stop and completion as a sentence ends. Thus the musical signs in the Hebrew text also provide an interpretation of the text current to the times in which the signs were incorporated as part of the text, the Masoretic vowel-pointing excluding those former tonal readings which clearly represented Christian textual interpretations. The signs that tie one word to another providing one thought are called "conjunctive" signs and the signs that separate words and the thought of them are called "disjunctive". An example of the use of these signs to interpret the Hebrew text is the well-known prophecy of the One to come. The Hebrew letters can either be understood to read "His name shall be called Wonderful counselor of (''from, sent by, representing'') the mighty God", or "His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God". The melody signs (called in Hebrew "Ta'mei HaMikra) decide for the latter. After "Wonderful" there is a disjunctive, after "Counsellor" there is a disjunctive, and after "Mighty" (but adj. after the noun in Hebrew order) there is a conjunctive. It is possible to reconstruct to some extent the melody and the interpretation of the Old Testament current in the first century and therefore the melody and the interpretation used by Jesus Himself.<ref name=Steinberg>[http://www.adath-shalom.ca/history_of_hebrew2a.htm History of the Ancient and Modern Hebrew Language, By David Steinberg. Phonemic Structure of Hebrew]<br/> David.Steinberg@houseofdavid.ca. http://www.houseofdavid.ca Home page |
| − | http://www.adath-shalom.ca/history_of_hebrewtoc.htm</ref> This is because of the following: the present day melodies of the various dispersions of the Jews are to a great extent different one from the other. Some of these dispersions are the Ashkenazi, representing the Jews exiled from Israel by the Romans in A.D. 70 and then on to the Rhine Valley, and then onto parts of Eastern Europe, Western Europe, America, etc., the Sephardim who saw the beginnings of their dispersion from Spain in the 15th Century and then on to Greece, Turkey, North Africa. Holland, and America, the Yemenites, the Bnei Israel of India, the Jews of Ethiopia, etc. etc., Yet, with the diversity in melodies of the Scriptures, there are certain features which are either identical or strikingly similar. Musicologist, [[Joel Segal]], pointed out over 40 years ago, that this could only have been possible if these dispersions were at one time together in the same place. The only time that all these dispersions were together in the same place was prior to the great dispersion of the first century and the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. | + | http://www.adath-shalom.ca/history_of_hebrewtoc.htm</ref> This is because of the following: the present-day melodies of the various dispersions of the Jews are to a great extent different one from the other. Some of these dispersions are the Ashkenazi, representing the Jews exiled from Israel by the Romans in A.D. 70 and then on to the Rhine Valley, and then onto parts of Eastern Europe, Western Europe, America, etc., the Sephardim who saw the beginnings of their dispersion from Spain in the 15th Century and then on to Greece, Turkey, North Africa. Holland, America, the Yemenites, the Bnei Israel of India, the Jews of Ethiopia, etc. Yet, with the diversity in melodies of the Scriptures, there are certain features that are either identical or strikingly similar. Musicologist, [[Joel Segal]], pointed out over 40 years ago, that this could only have been possible if these dispersions were at one time together in the same place. The only time that all these dispersions were together in the same place was prior to the great dispersion of the first century and the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. |
| | | | |
| | ===Old Testament Apocrypha=== | | ===Old Testament Apocrypha=== |
| Line 336: |
Line 336: |
| | Protestants do not include Psalm 151 and 3 and 4 Maccabees among the Apocrypha, but they also do not include these in their Bibles. The Reformation did not address the question of their canonical status. The Catholic Church did not include them in the canon of the Council of Trent, and they do not appear in regular editions of the Catholic Bible. They continue to be part of the [[Orthodox Church|Orthodox Bible]]. | | Protestants do not include Psalm 151 and 3 and 4 Maccabees among the Apocrypha, but they also do not include these in their Bibles. The Reformation did not address the question of their canonical status. The Catholic Church did not include them in the canon of the Council of Trent, and they do not appear in regular editions of the Catholic Bible. They continue to be part of the [[Orthodox Church|Orthodox Bible]]. |
| | | | |
| − | The Apocryphal books had been used in both Israel and Egypt and (except the Latin 2 Esdras which was part of the Vulgate) are part of the Old Testament in the Greek language used by Jews all over the Greek speaking world - particularly Alexandria, Egypt. This version is called the Septuaginta. The Septuaginta after the 1st century fell into disuse among Jews for two reasons - | + | The Apocryphal books had been used in both Israel and Egypt and (except the Latin 2 Esdras which was part of the Vulgate) are part of the Old Testament in the Greek language used by Jews all over the Greek-speaking world - particularly Alexandria, Egypt. This version is called the Septuaginta. The Septuaginta after the 1st century fell into disuse among Jews for two reasons - |
| − | :1. Greek speaking Christians were using the Septuaginta in their efforts to bring Jews to faith in Jesus Christ | + | :1. Greek-speaking Christians were using the Septuaginta in their efforts to bring Jews to faith in Jesus Christ |
| | :2. A number of the Apocryphal books were also apocalyptic, that is, focusing on the last days, the Kingdom of God in battle against the kingdoms of this world and the downfall of this world's empires. This was considered dangerous and liable to provoke Rome against the Jews. | | :2. A number of the Apocryphal books were also apocalyptic, that is, focusing on the last days, the Kingdom of God in battle against the kingdoms of this world and the downfall of this world's empires. This was considered dangerous and liable to provoke Rome against the Jews. |
| − | Alternative Greek translations to the Septuaginta, which was considered "loose" by the Rabbis, were adopted. These were the translations of three proselytes to Judaism, Theodosious, Aquillas, and Symmachus. The Jewish Rabbinic [[Council of Jamnia|"Council" of Jamnia]] (Yavneh on the Mediterraenian coast of Israel) in A.D. 90, under the leadership of Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai, effectively excluded the Apocryphal books (along with the Septuaginta) from the Jewish Canon by requiring, for a book to be considered canonical, that it have been written in Hebrew (and Aramaic). This immediately excludes ''all'' of the Christian scriptures included in the entire New Testament, since they were written in Greek and in the 1st century. Actually, a number of the apocryphal books, or portions thereof, had been written originally in Hebrew, most notably, the Book of Ben Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) found in Hebrew at Qumran with the rest of the Dead Sea Scrolls, but this was unknown to Yohanan Ben Zakkai and the Council of Jamnia in the first century. Under the impetus of Renaissance learning, Protestant scholars went directly to the Hebrew text and began to translate the Bible directly from the original languages of Hebrew and Greek, instead of having to go through the Latin Vulgate. But they consulted the Hebrew text of the Talmudic rabbinical version of the synagogue (eventually to be called the "Masoretic text") of the canon of books that had been recommended by the Council of Jamnia and afterward consistently authorized by subsequent rabbinical authorities representing Judaism. They also disregarded the witness of the canonical listing of the books of the Christian Orthodox Greek Bible, which had not been determined by the Council of Trent under the Roman Pontiff but had always been the traditional Old Testament as read from the time of the apostles and the most ancient Christian Church. In this way, most Protestant churches came to not include the Apocryphal books in their Canon of Scripture. One of the reasons the Roman Catholic Church held to the Vulgate was because it had been translated by Jerome from the Hebrew text before the text had been revised and altered by the Masoretes, and today it is considered a valuable witness to the earlier Hebrew Bible. | + | Alternative Greek translations to the Septuagint, which was considered "loose" by the Rabbis, were adopted. These were the translations of three proselytes to Judaism, Theodosius, Aquillas, and Symmachus. The Jewish Rabbinic [[Council of Jamnia|"Council" of Jamnia]] (Yavneh on the Mediterranean coast of Israel) in A.D. 90, under the leadership of Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai, effectively excluded the Apocryphal books (along with the Septuaginta) from the Jewish Canon by requiring, for a book to be considered canonical, that it has been written in Hebrew (and Aramaic). This immediately excludes ''all'' of the Christian scriptures included in the entire New Testament since they were written in Greek and in the 1st century. Actually, a number of the apocryphal books, or portions thereof, had been written originally in Hebrew, most notably, the Book of Ben Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) found in Hebrew at Qumran with the rest of the Dead Sea Scrolls, but this was unknown to Yohanan Ben Zakkai and the Council of Jamnia in the first century. Under the impetus of Renaissance learning, Protestant scholars went directly to the Hebrew text and began to translate the Bible directly from the original languages of Hebrew and Greek, instead of having to go through the Latin Vulgate. But they consulted the Hebrew text of the Talmudic rabbinical version of the synagogue (eventually to be called the "Masoretic text") of the canon of books that had been recommended by the Council of Jamnia and afterward consistently authorized by subsequent rabbinical authorities representing Judaism. They also disregarded the witness of the canonical listing of the books of the Christian Orthodox Greek Bible, which had not been determined by the Council of Trent under the Roman Pontiff but had always been the traditional Old Testament as read from the time of the apostles and the most ancient Christian Church. In this way, most Protestant churches came to not include the Apocryphal books in their Canon of Scripture. One of the reasons the Roman Catholic Church held to the Vulgate was because it had been translated by Jerome from the Hebrew text before the text had been revised and altered by the Masoretes, and today it is considered a valuable witness to the earlier Hebrew Bible. |
| | :"It has also proved of primary importance as an early and excellent witness to the sacred text." | | :"It has also proved of primary importance as an early and excellent witness to the sacred text." |
| | ::—The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (1915)<ref>[http://www.bible-researcher.com/vulgate1.html The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (1915) The Vulgate, by Samuel Angus.]</ref> | | ::—The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (1915)<ref>[http://www.bible-researcher.com/vulgate1.html The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (1915) The Vulgate, by Samuel Angus.]</ref> |
| Line 353: |
Line 353: |
| | *[[Book of Sirach|Ecclesiasticus]], also known as Sirach | | *[[Book of Sirach|Ecclesiasticus]], also known as Sirach |
| | *[[Book of Baruch]] | | *[[Book of Baruch]] |
| − | :*[[Epistle of Jeremiah]] is sometimes listed as separate book or the last chapter of Baruch | + | :*[[Epistle of Jeremiah]] is sometimes listed as a separate book or the last chapter of Baruch |
| | *[[Prayer of Manasseh]] | | *[[Prayer of Manasseh]] |
| | *Greek language additions to the [[Book of Esther]] | | *Greek language additions to the [[Book of Esther]] |
| | | | |
| − | Additions to the book of Daniel | + | Additions to the Book of Daniel |
| | *[[The Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Holy Children]] | | *[[The Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Holy Children]] |
| | *[[Story of Susanna]] | | *[[Story of Susanna]] |
| Line 384: |
Line 384: |
| | :[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2john%201:9-11&version=KJV 2 John 9-ll] | | :[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2john%201:9-11&version=KJV 2 John 9-ll] |
| | | | |
| − | Between A.D. 90–95, long after the descent of the Holy Spirit of God at Pentecost and the spread of Christianity and the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem and the devastation of the city and the expulsion of the Jews, the Jewish [[Council of Jamnia]] revised the canon of the Old Testament, by ensuring that the books involved conformed to the Torah, were written in the Hebrew language, written in Palestine, and written before 400 B.C. As a result, the Apocrypha was excluded from the Hebrew canon.<ref>[https://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/canon1.html The Jewish Canon and the Christian Canon] (web.cn.edu) <br/>Linguistic evidence shows that other Septuagint books which were excluded by rabbinical authority after A.D. 90 certainly had an original Hebrew or Aramaic text. See | + | Between A.D. 90–95, long after the descent of the Holy Spirit of God at Pentecost, the spread of Christianity, the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, the devastation of the city, and the expulsion of the Jews, the Jewish [[Council of Jamnia]] revised the canon of the Old Testament, by ensuring that the books involved conformed to the Torah, were written in the Hebrew language, written in Palestine, and written before 400 B.C. As a result, the Apocrypha was excluded from the Hebrew canon.<ref>[https://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/canon1.html The Jewish Canon and the Christian Canon] (web.cn.edu) <br/>Linguistic evidence shows that other Septuagint books which were excluded by rabbinical authority after A.D. 90 certainly had an original Hebrew or Aramaic text. See |
| | *[http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/apocrypha.html Jewish Virtual Library. Jewish Holy Scriptures: The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, by Michael E. Stone] | | *[http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/apocrypha.html Jewish Virtual Library. Jewish Holy Scriptures: The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, by Michael E. Stone] |
| | *[http://archive.churchsociety.org/crossway/documents/Cway_102_ApocryphaBackground.pdf BACKGROUND AND HISTORY TO THE APOCRYPHA, By David Phillips] Article reprinted from Cross†Way Issue Autumn 2006 No. 102 (archive.churchsociety.org) | | *[http://archive.churchsociety.org/crossway/documents/Cway_102_ApocryphaBackground.pdf BACKGROUND AND HISTORY TO THE APOCRYPHA, By David Phillips] Article reprinted from Cross†Way Issue Autumn 2006 No. 102 (archive.churchsociety.org) |
| | *[http://churchsociety.org/issues_new/doctrine/misc/apocrypha/iss_doctrine_misc_apocrypha_origin.asp The Origin of the Apocrypha] | | *[http://churchsociety.org/issues_new/doctrine/misc/apocrypha/iss_doctrine_misc_apocrypha_origin.asp The Origin of the Apocrypha] |
| − | *[https://books.google.com/books?id=dtlDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA203&lpg=PA203&dq=apocryphal+books+having+evidence+of+hebrew+or+aramaic+origin&source=bl&ots=CkMPwQMciG&sig=y6w4tnI_wvIqyzCWqCoN3xo8mvQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VGGcVP2RH4r2yQT7toKYAw&ved=0CFMQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=apocryphal%20books%20having%20evidence%20of%20hebrew%20or%20aramaic%20origin&f=false The Apocrypha of the Old Testament: With Historical Introductions, a Revised Translation, and Notes Critical and Explanatory, by Edwin Cone Bissell. Scribner, 1890. 680 pages], page 208ff, citing evidence that the "additions to Esther" were also translated from the Hebrew. (Google eBook)</ref> The books excluded by this criteria were relatively recent Jewish contributions of the 3rd through the 1st centuries before Christ which had become part of Jewish culture. The rabbinical authorities simultaneously excluded as condemned and false the writings of the "heretics" (the ''minim'', including Christians, called nozrim, no§rim, "Nazarenes"), and cursed Christians in a synagogue service "benediction" against them and others. Palestinian texts of the Eighteen Benedictions from the Cairo Genizah <ref>[http://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/treasures-in-the-wall The New Yorker: Page-Turner. March 1, 2013 Treasures in the Wall, by Emily Greenhouse] (newyorker.com)<br/>[http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Genizah.html Jewish Virtual Library: Modern Jewish History: The Cairo Genizah, by Alden Oreck]</ref> present a text of the benediction which identifies the minim:<blockquote>"''For the apostates may there be no hope unless they return to Your Torah. As for the no§rim and the minim, may they perish immediately. Speedily may they be erased from the Book of Life, and may they not be registered among the righteous. Blessed are You, O Lord, Who subdues the wicked.''"</blockquote>While other specimens of the Palestinian liturgy show slight variation, the no§rim, (usually translated “Christians”) and minim are included in the best texts of this benediction. The fact remains that the no§rim were included with apostates and heretics and the wicked in the Genizah documents.<ref>[http://lawrenceschiffman.com/?s=the+benediction+against+the+minim Professor Lawrence H. Schiffman: The Benediction Against the Minim] (lawrenceschiffman.com)<br/>[http://www.defendingthebride.com/bb/curse.html DEFENDING THE BRIDE. THE CURSE AGAINST CHRISTIANS AT JAMNIA ABOUT 90 AD] (defendingthebride.com)<br/>[https://www.academia.edu/6811953/The_Jewish_Council_of_Jamnia_and_Its_Impact_on_the_Old_Testament_Canon_and_New_Testament_Studies The Jewish “Council” of Jamnia and Its Impact on the Old Testament Canon and New Testament Studies, Tim Gordon October 20, 2007] (academia.edu/6811953)</ref> Martin Luther and the leaders of the [[Reformation]] cite as authoritative and determinative the canon of the Hebrew Bible as defined by rabbinical authorities who excluded and condemned as false the entire New Testament scriptures and Jesus as the Messiah <ref name=Luther>Luther rejected the seven books of the Old Testament, citing the Palestinian Canon as his authority. Clearly his reasons were doctrinal. However, his decision poses serious difficulties. What authority from God would Jews have in the Christian era to determine which books of the Old Testament were or were not divinely inspired? In 1529, Luther proposed adoption of the 39-book canon of rabbinic Judaism as the Old Testament canon of the Christian Bible. He justified his decision to exclude seven books from the Old Testament canon of 46 books by an appeal to precedent, citing Jerome who, around A.D. 400 had expressed concerns also voiced by his rabbinical sources that these books in Greek had no Hebrew counterparts. Research into the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran has discovered Hebrew copies of some of the disputed books, which makes their rejection on this ground unsupportable. Luther's principal reason for opposing these Old Testament books seems to be that they contain textual support for doctrines he had rejected, such as praying for the dead (2 Maccabees 12:42-45).<br/>See [http://www.totustuus.com/luther Luther and the Canon of the Bible, by Jim Seghers]<br/>[http://www.olswahiawa.org/uploads/2/1/8/4/21845996/session_3.pdf The Canon of the Bible]<br/>[http://catholicdefense.blogspot.com/2011/07/can-protestants-rely-upon-council-of.html Wednesday, July 20, 2011. Can Protestants Rely Upon the "Council of Jamnia" for Their Bible?]</ref> because "''unto them were committed the oracles of God.''" (see [http://biblehub.com/multi/romans/3-2.htm Romans 3:2]). This is an historical fact, and it presents a serious problem, known in logic ''as [[non sequitur]]''. If the Jews have been so entrusted with the word of God that they had therefore been given the divine authority to also determine the ''canon'' of sacred scripture, as Luther and the Reformation Protestants maintain, then the whole New Testament is excluded from the canon of the holy Bible because it does not meet the four established rabbinical criteria for what is sacred inspired scripture. See [[Logical fallacy]] | + | *[https://books.google.com/books?id=dtlDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA203&lpg=PA203&dq=apocryphal+books+having+evidence+of+hebrew+or+aramaic+origin&source=bl&ots=CkMPwQMciG&sig=y6w4tnI_wvIqyzCWqCoN3xo8mvQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VGGcVP2RH4r2yQT7toKYAw&ved=0CFMQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=apocryphal%20books%20having%20evidence%20of%20hebrew%20or%20aramaic%20origin&f=false The Apocrypha of the Old Testament: With Historical Introductions, a Revised Translation, and Notes Critical and Explanatory, by Edwin Cone Bissell. Scribner, 1890. 680 pages], page 208ff, citing evidence that the "additions to Esther" were also translated from Hebrew. (Google eBook)</ref> The books excluded by this criteria were relatively recent Jewish contributions of the 3rd through the 1st centuries before Christ which had become part of Jewish culture. The rabbinical authorities simultaneously excluded as condemned and false the writings of the "heretics" (the ''minim'', including Christians, called nozrim, no§rim, "Nazarenes"), and cursed Christians in a synagogue service "benediction" against them and others. Palestinian texts of the Eighteen Benedictions from the Cairo Genizah <ref>[http://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/treasures-in-the-wall The New Yorker: Page-Turner. March 1, 2013 Treasures in the Wall, by Emily Greenhouse] (newyorker.com)<br/>[http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Genizah.html Jewish Virtual Library: Modern Jewish History: The Cairo Genizah, by Alden Oreck]</ref> present a text of the benediction which identifies the minim:<blockquote>"''For the apostates may there be no hope unless they return to Your Torah. As for the no§rim and the minim, may they perish immediately. Speedily may they be erased from the Book of Life, and may they not be registered among the righteous. Blessed are You, O Lord, Who subdues the wicked.''"</blockquote>While other specimens of the Palestinian liturgy show slight variation, the no§rim, (usually translated “Christians”) and minim are included in the best texts of this benediction. The fact remains that the no§rim were included with apostates and heretics and the wicked in the Genizah documents.<ref>[http://lawrenceschiffman.com/?s=the+benediction+against+the+minim Professor Lawrence H. Schiffman: The Benediction Against the Minim] (lawrenceschiffman.com)<br/>[http://www.defendingthebride.com/bb/curse.html DEFENDING THE BRIDE. THE CURSE AGAINST CHRISTIANS AT JAMNIA ABOUT 90 AD] (defendingthebride.com)<br/>[https://www.academia.edu/6811953/The_Jewish_Council_of_Jamnia_and_Its_Impact_on_the_Old_Testament_Canon_and_New_Testament_Studies The Jewish “Council” of Jamnia and Its Impact on the Old Testament Canon and New Testament Studies, Tim Gordon October 20, 2007] (academia.edu/6811953)</ref> Martin Luther and the leaders of the [[Reformation]] cite as authoritative and determinative the canon of the Hebrew Bible as defined by rabbinical authorities who excluded and condemned as false the entire New Testament scriptures and Jesus as the Messiah <ref name=Luther>Luther rejected the seven books of the Old Testament, citing the Palestinian Canon as his authority. Clearly, his reasons were doctrinal. However, his decision poses serious difficulties. What authority from God would Jews have in the Christian era to determine which books of the Old Testament were or were not divinely inspired? In 1529, Luther proposed the adoption of the 39-book canon of rabbinic Judaism as the Old Testament canon of the Christian Bible. He justified his decision to exclude seven books from the Old Testament canon of 46 books by an appeal to precedent, citing Jerome who, around A.D. 400 had expressed concerns also voiced by his rabbinical sources that these books in Greek had no Hebrew counterparts. Research into the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran has discovered Hebrew copies of some of the disputed books, which makes their rejection on this ground unsupportable. Luther's principal reason for opposing these Old Testament books seems to be that they contain textual support for doctrines he had rejected, such as praying for the dead (2 Maccabees 12:42-45).<br/>See [http://www.totustuus.com/luther Luther and the Canon of the Bible, by Jim Seghers]<br/>[http://www.olswahiawa.org/uploads/2/1/8/4/21845996/session_3.pdf The Canon of the Bible]<br/>[http://catholicdefense.blogspot.com/2011/07/can-protestants-rely-upon-council-of.html Wednesday, July 20, 2011. Can Protestants Rely Upon the "Council of Jamnia" for Their Bible?]</ref> because "''unto them were committed the oracles of God.''" (see [http://biblehub.com/multi/romans/3-2.htm Romans 3:2]). This is an historical fact, and it presents a serious problem, known in logic ''as [[non sequitur]]''. If the Jews have been so entrusted with the word of God that they had therefore been given the divine authority to also determine the ''canon'' of sacred scripture, as Luther and the Reformation Protestants maintain, then the whole New Testament is excluded from the canon of the holy Bible because it does not meet the four established rabbinical criteria for what is sacred inspired scripture. See [[Logical fallacy]] |
| | | | |
| | ===The New Testament=== | | ===The New Testament=== |
| Line 402: |
Line 402: |
| | The ''Acts of the Apostles'' are a continuance of the Gospels, documenting the history of the early church, beginning immediately following Jesus' death and resurrection. Some lists put Acts as a separate category from the Gospels. | | The ''Acts of the Apostles'' are a continuance of the Gospels, documenting the history of the early church, beginning immediately following Jesus' death and resurrection. Some lists put Acts as a separate category from the Gospels. |
| | | | |
| − | Of the authors, only Matthew and John had met Jesus; they were among His disciples during His earthly ministry. Eusebius, in his ''Ecclesiastical History'', says:<blockquote>Matthew and John are the only ones that have left us recorded comments, and even they, tradition says, undertook it from necessity. Matthew also, having '''first proclaimed the Gospel in Hebrew''' when on the point of going also to other nations, '''committed it to writing in his native tongue''', and thus supplied the want of his presence to them by his writings. But after, when Mark and Luke had already published their Gospels, they say that John, who during all this time was proclaiming the gospel without writing, at length proceeded to write it on the following occasion. The three Gospels previously written, having been distributed among all, and also handed to him, they say that he admitted them, giving his testimony to their truth; but that there was only wanting in the narrative the account of the things done by Christ, among the first of his deeds, and at the commencement of the Gospel. And this was the truth. —Book III, Chapter XXIV.<ref>''The Ecclesiastical History Of Eusebius Pamphilus: Bishop Of Caesarea, In Palestine'', translated from the Greek, by the Rev. C. F. Crusé, A.M., assistant professor in the University of Pennsylvania. With Notes from the Edition of Valesius. London: George Bell and Sons, York Street, Covent Garden. 1874. ''Legacy Reprint Series''. Book III, Chapter XXIV The order of the Gospels. page 97</ref> (<small>Boldface emphasis added</small>) .</blockquote> Eusebius relates the already-existing tradition in his day that Matthew wrote the first Gospel. In every manuscript of the New Testament, Matthew is always placed first, and for almost 1900 years the traditional view prevailed unchallenged that Matthew was the first Gospel written. This is called the [[Augustinian hypothesis]], which holds that Matthew was the first Gospel, written by Matthew the Evangelist. Mark, according to tradition a Roman, and a companion of Peter, was author of the second Gospel, but beginning in the 19th century Heinrich Julius Holtzmann together with other German scholars, abusing the literary tools of [[Historical-critical method (Higher criticism)|historical-critical methods]] in opposition to Christian tradition, declared on their authority as German scholars that Mark's gospel was the first to be written down, about A.D. 50. This theory is called "Marcan priority", and it was aggressively spread as part of [[Otto von Bismarck|Bismarck's]] anti-Catholic 'Kulturkampf' policy.<ref>[http://www.ewtn.com/library/SCRIPTUR/KULTGOS.TXT Kulturkampf and the Gospel, by John Beaumont]<br/>[http://www.churchinhistory.org/pages/booklets/farmer%28n%29.htm Church in History. The ChurchinHistory Information Centre. BISMARCK AND THE FOUR GOSPELS 1870 - 1914, by William R. Farmer (University of Dallas) Editor of A NEW CATHOLIC BIBLE COMMENTARY. The theory that Mark's Gospel was published before Matthew's is widely held in German and English speaking countries. This article shows how this theory, with little supporting evidence, came to be spread as part of Bismarck's anti-Catholic 'Kulturkampf' policy. BIBLIOTHECA EPHEMERIDUM THEOLOGICARUM LOVANIENSIUM. THE FOUR GOSPELS. 1992] (churchinhistory.org)</ref> This view is widely held by liberal biblical scholars in German and English speaking countries. In the United States acceptance of Marcan Priority has often been a test of the "academic competency" of those faculty members who teach Biblical Studies.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=UYKvAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA282&lpg=PA282&dq=academic+persecution+regarding+Augustinian+hypothesis&source=bl&ots=iDysvbe5ii&sig=oNOrQku42-Tx-n-yBzhQtzAeQls&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VHKkVNa7IceiyAStsYKYAw&ved=0CEQQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=academic%20persecution%20regarding%20Augustinian%20hypothesis&f=false Mark's Gospel--Prior or Posterior?: A Reappraisal of the Phenomenon of Order, By David Neville]</ref> Luke is traditionally considered to be the author of both the third Gospel and the ''Acts''. | + | Of the authors, only Matthew and John had met Jesus; they were among His disciples during His earthly ministry. Eusebius, in his ''Ecclesiastical History'', says:<blockquote>Matthew and John are the only ones that have left us recorded comments, and even they, tradition says, undertook it from necessity. Matthew also, having '''first proclaimed the Gospel in Hebrew''' when on the point of going also to other nations, '''committed it to writing in his native tongue''', and thus supplied the want of his presence to them by his writings. But after, when Mark and Luke had already published their Gospels, they say that John, who during all this time was proclaiming the gospel without writing, at length proceeded to write it on the following occasion. The three Gospels previously written, having been distributed among all and also handed to him, say that he admitted them, giving his testimony to their truth; but that there was only wanting in the narrative the account of the things done by Christ, among the first of his deeds, and at the commencement of the Gospel. And this was the truth. —Book III, Chapter XXIV.<ref>''The Ecclesiastical History Of Eusebius Pamphilus: Bishop Of Caesarea, In Palestine'', translated from Greek, by the Rev. C. F. Crusé, A.M., assistant professor at the University of Pennsylvania. With Notes from the Edition of Valesius. London: George Bell and Sons, York Street, Covent Garden. 1874. ''Legacy Reprint Series''. Book III, Chapter XXIV The order of the Gospels. page 97</ref> (<small>Boldface emphasis added</small>) .</blockquote> Eusebius relates the already-existing tradition in his day that Matthew wrote the first Gospel. In every manuscript of the New Testament, Matthew is always placed first, and for almost 1900 years the traditional view prevailed unchallenged that Matthew was the first Gospel written. This is called the [[Augustinian hypothesis]], which holds that Matthew was the first Gospel, written by Matthew the Evangelist. Mark, according to tradition a Roman, and a companion of Peter, was the author of the second Gospel, but beginning in the 19th century Heinrich Julius Holtzmann together with other German scholars, abused the literary tools of [[Historical-critical method (Higher criticism)|historical-critical methods]] in opposition to Christian tradition, declared on their authority as German scholars that Mark's gospel was the first to be written down, about A.D. 50. This theory is called "Marcan priority", and it was aggressively spread as part of [[Otto von Bismarck|Bismarck's]] anti-Catholic 'Kulturkampf' policy.<ref>[http://www.ewtn.com/library/SCRIPTUR/KULTGOS.TXT Kulturkampf and the Gospel, by John Beaumont]<br/>[http://www.churchinhistory.org/pages/booklets/farmer%28n%29.htm Church in History. The ChurchinHistory Information Centre. BISMARCK AND THE FOUR GOSPELS 1870 - 1914, by William R. Farmer (University of Dallas) Editor of A NEW CATHOLIC BIBLE COMMENTARY. The theory that Mark's Gospel was published before Matthew's is widely held in German and English-speaking countries. This article shows how this theory, with little supporting evidence, came to be spread as part of Bismarck's anti-Catholic 'Kulturkampf' policy. BIBLIOTHECA EPHEMERIDUM THEOLOGICARUM LOVANIENSIUM. THE FOUR GOSPELS. 1992] (churchinhistory.org)</ref> This view is widely held by liberal biblical scholars in German and English-speaking countries. In the United States acceptance of Marcan Priority has often been a test of the "academic competency" of those faculty members who teach Biblical Studies.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=UYKvAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA282&lpg=PA282&dq=academic+persecution+regarding+Augustinian+hypothesis&source=bl&ots=iDysvbe5ii&sig=oNOrQku42-Tx-n-yBzhQtzAeQls&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VHKkVNa7IceiyAStsYKYAw&ved=0CEQQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=academic%20persecution%20regarding%20Augustinian%20hypothesis&f=false Mark's Gospel--Prior or Posterior?: A Reappraisal of the Phenomenon of Order, By David Neville]</ref> Luke is traditionally considered to be the author of both the third Gospel and the ''Acts''. |
| | *[[Gospel of Matthew]] | | *[[Gospel of Matthew]] |
| | *[[Gospel of Mark]] | | *[[Gospel of Mark]] |
| Line 470: |
Line 470: |
| | ==Non-uniformity of language and style of original Scriptures== | | ==Non-uniformity of language and style of original Scriptures== |
| | | | |
| − | Both the Old Testament and the New Testament, in the original languages of Hebrew (and Aramaic) and Greek, exhibit a non uniformity of style and language. This is in sharp contrast to most modern translations which treat the Scriptures throughout as if they are one book instead of the many books they are. Modern translations can be erudite, dignified, folksy and common, clear and geared for the "common man", or replete with language resonant with literary associations for the "accomplished" reader. But they are that way throughout. The Biblical originals, on the other hand, for example, embedded in the Hebrew within the narrative of the deeds of the prophetess Debora, have in the Song of Deborah (Judges chapter 5) a much more ancient and even archaic Hebrew than that of the main text of the book, probably emanating from a chant from the time of Deborah herself, plainly evident to any person who has studied Hebrew language. The same with the narrative and poetic portions concerning Moses. The human authors, inspired by God, were careful to preserve the integrity of the original inspired songs which they had faithfully recorded or otherwise copied and included in their narratives. There are even different Hebrew languages (rather dialects) from the same historical period but from different authors living during the same time, having come from different origins and cultural levels.<ref name=Steinberg/> | + | Both the Old Testament and the New Testament, in the original languages of Hebrew (and Aramaic) and Greek, exhibit a nonuniformity of style and language. This is in sharp contrast to most modern translations which treat the Scriptures throughout as if they are one book instead of the many books they are. Modern translations can be erudite, dignified, folksy and common, clear and geared for the "common man", or replete with language resonant with literary associations for the "accomplished" reader. But they are that way throughout. The Biblical originals, on the other hand, for example, embedded in the Hebrew within the narrative of the deeds of the prophetess Debora, have in the Song of Deborah (Judges chapter 5) a much more ancient and even archaic Hebrew than that of the main text of the book, probably emanating from a chant from the time of Deborah herself, plainly evident to any person who has studied the Hebrew language. The same with the narrative and poetic portions concerning Moses. The human authors, inspired by God, were careful to preserve the integrity of the original songs that they had faithfully recorded or otherwise copied and included in their narratives. There are even different Hebrew languages (rather dialects) from the same historical period but from different authors living during the same time, having come from different origins and cultural levels.<ref name=Steinberg/> |
| | | | |
| − | For the New Testament, an example of non-uniformity can be found in the stark differences of language in the Gospel of Luke, written by Luke the physician. The early accounts, those concerning the birth of Jesus and early life, are written in a stilted and often crude Greek while the rest of the Gospel is written in fine Greek befitting of the background and ability of a learned physician. But when the stilted and crude Greek is retranslated, word for word and phrase for phrase, into the Hebrew current in the first century in most parts of Israel (a technique called "back translation"), it becomes excellent Hebrew - Mishnaic Hebrew. This is because of the intent and fastidiousness of Luke, who derived his material, as he says, from people that had been "on the scene", and his success in transmitting it faithfully as he had received it. Both the Old and New Testaments, for various reasons, exhibit little or no concern to "level through" or override the content of what they are saying by stylistic considerations. | + | For the New Testament, an example of non-uniformity can be found in the stark differences in language in the Gospel of Luke, written by Luke the physician. The early accounts, those concerning the birth of Jesus and early life, are written in a stilted and often crude Greek while the rest of the Gospel is written in fine Greek befitting of the background and ability of a learned physician. But when the stilted and crude Greek is retranslated, word for word and phrase for phrase, into the Hebrew current in the first century in most parts of Israel (a technique called "back translation"), it becomes excellent Hebrew-Mishnaic Hebrew. This is because of the intent and fastidiousness of Luke, who derived his material, as he says, from people that had been "on the scene", and his success in transmitting it faithfully as he had received it. Both the Old and New Testaments, for various reasons, exhibit little or no concern to "level through" or override the content of what they are saying by stylistic considerations. |
| | | | |
| | ===Inspiration=== | | ===Inspiration=== |
| Line 478: |
Line 478: |
| | | | |
| | The apostle [[Paul]] wrote that "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:16). | | The apostle [[Paul]] wrote that "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:16). |
| − | Similarly the apostle [[Saint Peter|Peter]] wrote, "Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit" (2 Peter 1:20-21). | + | Similarly, the apostle [[Saint Peter|Peter]] wrote, "Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit" (2 Peter 1:20-21). |
| | | | |
| | ====Formation of New Testament and Jewish technical transmission==== | | ====Formation of New Testament and Jewish technical transmission==== |
| − | In the first century and prior, the ear was more important than the eye, as far as retaining in memory. Jews would receive orally, that is, from hearing, the laws that they believed originated with Moses and then passed them on to others, down through the generations. It was important to link the present rabbis by names who taught it with the rabbis by name who had passed it on to them, on back as far as possible to Moses on Mt. Sinai. This was the startling difference of Jesus. By saying "You have heard it said, but I say unto you...", He was by-passing Moses and the others after and getting His teaching direct from the Father. | + | In the first century and prior, the ear was more important than the eye, as far as retaining memory. Jews would receive orally, that is, from hearing, the laws that they believed originated with Moses and then passed them on to others, down through the generations. It was important to link the present rabbis by names who taught it with the rabbis by name who had passed it on to them, on back as far as possible to Moses on Mt. Sinai. This was the startling difference of Jesus. By saying "You have heard it said, but I say unto you...", He was by-passing Moses and the others after and getting His teaching direct from the Father. |
| | | | |
| | This Jewish way of receiving (QBL) and handing on (MSR) is summed up in the lead saying of the "Ethics of the Fathers" tractate of the [[Mishna]], "Moses received Torah from God at Sinai. He transmitted it to Joshua, Joshua to the elders, the elders to the prophets, the prophets to the members of the Great Assembly [Sanhedrin] (1:1)." The teaching thus transmitted was memorized word for word by groups of disciples (Talmidim) together, thereby minimizing, by the common knowledge and public repetitions, all innovations and errors, though there might well have been "stylizing" for ease of retention and recall, receiving and handing on (transmission). | | This Jewish way of receiving (QBL) and handing on (MSR) is summed up in the lead saying of the "Ethics of the Fathers" tractate of the [[Mishna]], "Moses received Torah from God at Sinai. He transmitted it to Joshua, Joshua to the elders, the elders to the prophets, the prophets to the members of the Great Assembly [Sanhedrin] (1:1)." The teaching thus transmitted was memorized word for word by groups of disciples (Talmidim) together, thereby minimizing, by the common knowledge and public repetitions, all innovations and errors, though there might well have been "stylizing" for ease of retention and recall, receiving and handing on (transmission). |
| | | | |
| − | This methodology, with its technical Hebrew terminology appears in the New Testament with the same technical meaning and purpose, for how the earliest Christian teaching was carried on prior to the formation of the New Testament and during the time of its formation. This ensured the validity of the teaching and its authenticity going back, not to Moses, but to the time of Jesus Himself. "For I handed over (Gk. pare'doka, Heb. MSR) to you at the first what I also received (Gk. pare'labon, Heb. QBL) that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures, and that He was raised on the third day, according to the Scriptures..." l Cor. 15:3. Paul knew all of the "deposit of faith" three ways, in the usual "collaborative" way of God - from Scriptures (the Old Testament), from experience (seeing the living Christ on the road to Damascas), and from authenticated oral tradition/transmission involving "receiving" and "handing on". | + | This methodology, with its technical Hebrew terminology, appears in the New Testament with the same technical meaning and purpose, for how the earliest Christian teaching was carried on prior to the formation of the New Testament and during the time of its formation. This ensured the validity of the teaching and its authenticity going back, not to Moses, but to the time of Jesus Himself. "For I handed over (Gk. pare'doka, Heb. MSR) to you at the first what I also received (Gk. pare'labon, Heb. QBL) that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures, and that He was raised on the third day, according to the Scriptures..." l Cor. 15:3. Paul knew all of the "deposit of faith" three ways, in the usual "collaborative" way of God - from Scriptures (the Old Testament), from experience (seeing the living Christ on the road to Damascas), and from authenticated oral tradition/transmission involving "receiving" and "handing on". |
| | | | |
| | ==Authority of Bible in religious communities== | | ==Authority of Bible in religious communities== |
| Line 493: |
Line 493: |
| | ''See also:'' [[Torah]] and [[Old Testament]] | | ''See also:'' [[Torah]] and [[Old Testament]] |
| | | | |
| − | Orthodox Judaism through the centuries, while it was only marginally affected by growing secularization and modern learning, held to a "differing levels of authority" understanding of the authority of the Hebrew Bible. This did not imply different levels of inspiration, but rather that importance to the regulation of life was prime for the Torah of Moses, the 5 books of the Law. But the Pharasaic teaching also posited an Oral Law given to Moses by God that was passed on through the centuries through Joshua, the prophets, pairs of Rabbis, until this day. The Oral law is found in the Talmud (Mishna and the Gemara together). The oral law became the decisive interpreter, teacher and regulator of the Written Law and determined the course of Jewish Orthodox life. The second section of the Old Testament, the Prophets, is known to the Jewish Community primarily through the synagogue readings of the prophets, the Haftorah, that are assigned to conclude the weekly reading of the Law. The Psalms, the most formative of all the Writings, besides being common throughout the synagogue services, are used in various devotional prayer contexts. Orthodox Judaism has little been affected by modern Higher Criticism of the Bible. Reformed Judaism, originally developed in Germany, and Conservative Judaism, to a lesser extent, have been greatly affected. | + | Orthodox Judaism through the centuries, while it was only marginally affected by growing secularization and modern learning, held to a "differing levels of authority" understanding of the authority of the Hebrew Bible. This did not imply different levels of inspiration, but rather that the importance to the regulation of life was prime for the Torah of Moses, the 5 books of the Law. But the Pharasaic teaching also posited an Oral Law given to Moses by God that was passed on through the centuries through Joshua, the prophets, and pairs of Rabbis, until this day. The Oral law is found in the Talmud (Mishna and the Gemara together). The oral law became the decisive interpreter, teacher and regulator of the Written Law and determined the course of Jewish Orthodox life. The second section of the Old Testament, the Prophets, is known to the Jewish Community primarily through the synagogue readings of the prophets, the Haftorah, that are assigned to conclude the weekly reading of the Law. The Psalms, the most formative of all the Writings, besides being common throughout the synagogue services, are used in various devotional prayer contexts. Orthodox Judaism has little been affected by modern Higher Criticism of the Bible. Reformed Judaism, originally developed in Germany, and Conservative Judaism, to a lesser extent, have been greatly affected. |
| | | | |
| | ===Mainline Protestants=== | | ===Mainline Protestants=== |
| − | Mainline Protestantism, represented in the major Protestant churches, denominations, sects and their seminaries, has greatly been affected by "modernism" based on advanced scholarly research, especially from Germany in the 19th century. Those who abused the legitimate tools "Higher Criticism" chose as a fundamental liberal [[premise]] to ignore God's participation in the production of Scripture. Prime among these theories is the Documentary theory of Penteteuch origins (Wellhausen-Graff) that posits that Moses wrote little or nothing. Instead, they propose that the Bible originated in four unknown hypothetical sources coming from various periods. These four sources are termed J (for the use of "Jehovah" for the name of God), E (for the use of "Elohim"), P (priestly), and D (Deuteronomic). The "spirit" of the New Testament (according to their understanding of what they think is the probable main attitude of the writers, derived from the overall impression gained from a generally humanist religious point of view) is far more important than the text of either Testament for modern Protestant theology. | + | Mainline Protestantism, represented in the major Protestant churches, denominations, sects and their seminaries, has greatly been affected by "modernism" based on advanced scholarly research, especially from Germany in the 19th century. Those who abused the legitimate tools "Higher Criticism" chose as a fundamental liberal [[premise]] to ignore God's participation in the production of Scripture. Prime among these theories is the Documentary theory of Penteteuch origins (Wellhausen-Graff) which posits that Moses wrote little or nothing. Instead, they propose that the Bible originated in four unknown hypothetical sources coming from various periods. These four sources are termed J (for the use of "Jehovah" for the name of God), E (for the use of "Elohim"), P (priestly), and D (Deuteronomic). The "spirit" of the New Testament (according to their understanding of what they think is the probable main attitude of the writers, derived from the overall impression gained from a generally humanist religious point of view) is far more important than the text of either Testament for modern Protestant theology. |
| | | | |
| | ====Orthodox Jewish critique of Documentary theory==== | | ====Orthodox Jewish critique of Documentary theory==== |
| − | Jewish Orthodox scholars have pointed to flaws in the Documentary Hypothesis. For instance, Orthodox Jewish Scholar Cassuto has pointed out that rather than the names for God varying according to author and period, they vary according to emphasis from the same period, that of Moses - "Jehovah" being used for God in his dealing with His covenental people Israel, and "Elohim" being used when His dealings with mankind are emphasized. Likewise the two terms usually translated "making a covenant", ''lkhrot brit'' (to "cut" a covenant) and ''lehaqim brit'' (to "raise" a covenenat) are not from two sources but mean two different things - to initiate a covenant and to fulfill a covenant. | + | Jewish Orthodox scholars have pointed to flaws in the Documentary Hypothesis. For instance, Orthodox Jewish Scholar Cassuto has pointed out that rather than the names for God varying according to author and period, they vary according to emphasis from the same period, that of Moses - "Jehovah" being used for God in his dealing with His covenental people Israel, and "Elohim" being used when His dealings with mankind are emphasized. Likewise the two terms usually translated "making a covenant", ''lkhrot brit'' (to "cut" a covenant) and ''lehaqim brit'' (to "raise" a covenenat) are not from two sources but mean two different things - to initiate a covenant and to fulfill a covenant. |
| | | | |
| | ===Evangelical, Fundamentalist, and Pentecostal/charismatic Protestants=== | | ===Evangelical, Fundamentalist, and Pentecostal/charismatic Protestants=== |
| − | Outside of the mainline denominations, Protestantism believes strongly in the divine inspiration and inerrancy of the whole Bible and has been the most receptive of the doctrine of the full sufficiency of Biblical Authority. Believing in full inspiration of the whole of Scripture does not mean the equal importance of all Scriptures for the healthy growth of the Christian community. This is because these groups, following Scripture's own self-disclosure, believes in progressive revelation throughout Biblical time, culminating in Jesus Christ, and no further (thus obviating the role of Tradition). Thus it does not hold to the application of Mosaic Legislation, and other biblical elements that Orthodox Judaism holds to. This applies to faith and to morals. The Mosaic regulation on executing a rebellious child does not present a problem as, according to Paul and Hebrews, the Law has been rendered obsolete by the New Covenant. The Destruction of the Temple and of the place for sacrifice of all kinds, present no problem, as they did for Judaism, as Christ's sacrifice on the cross has now "fulfilled" the prescriptions of the Law and the ceremonials attached. Thus there is a sort of "levels of authority" understanding similar to the levels of authority of Judaism (but for different reasons). | + | Outside of the mainline denominations, Protestantism believes strongly in the divine inspiration and inerrancy of the whole Bible and has been the most receptive to the doctrine of the full sufficiency of Biblical Authority. Believing in the full inspiration of the whole of Scripture does not mean the equal importance of all Scriptures for the healthy growth of the Christian community. This is because these groups, following Scripture's own self-disclosure, believe in progressive revelation throughout Biblical time, culminating in Jesus Christ, and no further (thus obviating the role of Tradition). Thus it does not hold to the application of Mosaic Legislation and other biblical elements that Orthodox Judaism holds to. This applies to faith and to morals. The Mosaic regulation on executing a rebellious child does not present a problem as, according to Paul and Hebrews, the Law has been rendered obsolete by the New Covenant. The Destruction of the Temple and of the place for sacrifice of all kinds, present no problem, as they did for Judaism, as Christ's sacrifice on the cross has now "fulfilled" the prescriptions of the Law and the ceremonials attached. Thus there is a sort of "levels of authority" understanding similar to the levels of authority of Judaism (but for different reasons). |
| | | | |
| − | These churches vigorously promote the reading of Scripture through Sunday sermons and Bible study programs. Emphasis is placed on "each one understanding". Coupled with American individualism, and lack of traditional vehicles of authority, this sometimes leads to splintering of worshiping communities and the insistence that each man's interpretation "is as good as any other" (or one group claiming that its interpretation is "correct", implying all others are wrong, but only in extreme cases would the group label the others as heretic). Nevertheless, "The Fundamentals" defined in 1910 are strongly retained by the Evangelical Churches - the divinity of Christ, His death for sins and Resurrection from the dead, His second coming.<ref>''[https://web.archive.org/web/20030101082327/http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/6528/fundcont.htm The Fundamentals: A Testimony To The Truth'', 1910–1915, 4 Vol.] [http://www.biola.edu/about/history/ Bible Institute of Los Angeles,] ed. [http://www.dbts.edu/journals/1996_1/ACDIXON.PDF A. C. Dixon], [[Reuben Archer Torrey]].</ref> | + | These churches vigorously promote the reading of Scripture through Sunday sermons and Bible study programs. Emphasis is placed on "each one understanding". Coupled with American individualism, and lack of traditional vehicles of authority, this sometimes leads to the splintering of worshiping communities and the insistence that each man's interpretation "is as good as any other" (or one group claiming that its interpretation is "correct", implying all others are wrong, but only in extreme cases would the group label the others as heretic). Nevertheless, "The Fundamentals" defined in 1910 are strongly retained by the Evangelical Churches - the divinity of Christ, His death for sins and Resurrection from the dead, His second coming.<ref>''[https://web.archive.org/web/20030101082327/http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/6528/fundcont.htm The Fundamentals: A Testimony To The Truth'', 1910–1915, 4 Vol.] [http://www.biola.edu/about/history/ Bible Institute of Los Angeles,] ed. [http://www.dbts.edu/journals/1996_1/ACDIXON.PDF A. C. Dixon], [[Reuben Archer Torrey]].</ref> |
| | | | |
| | ===Eastern Orthodox=== | | ===Eastern Orthodox=== |
| Line 510: |
Line 510: |
| | | | |
| | ===Roman Catholic=== | | ===Roman Catholic=== |
| − | The Roman Catholic Church, like the Orthodox Churches, has a strong sense of the Authority ([[Magisterium]]) given to the Bishops by Christ to teach, interpret, defend the Faith and therefore to exercise the responsibility to interpret to the Faithful both Holy Scripture and Apostolic Tradition. But since [[Vatican II]], there has been an increased effort to bring Scriptural knowledge to the laity, and now there has been an increase of Scripture reading and study programs throughout most sections of the Church. This as been abetted by the Catholic Charismatic movement which has had the effect of promoting individual appropriation of the gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit, and with that, the correlate devotional and intellectual use of Holy Scriptures. However, the role of "Magisterium", that is the Teaching Authority, sets firm limits to individual interpretation. The Roman Catholic church understands that, though Magisterial authority is given to all the bishops, the definitive exercise of the Magisterium is limited to one bishop - the bishop of Rome, the Pope, and to the bishops in communion together with him. Further, Catholicism teaches that the Pope, when he declares dogma (teaching) ''[[Ex cathedra|ex-Cathedra]]'' (from the chair), he speaks infallibly (on matters of faith and morals). The first time the Pope promulgated dogma ''ex-cathedra'' formally was to promulgate the doctrine itself of Papal Infallibility, based on Scripture, history, and reason.<ref>[http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum20.htm Papal Encyclicals Online. Decrees of the First Vatican Council]<br/>[http://www.catholic.com/tracts/papal-infallibility Catholic Answers. Papal Infallibility]</ref> The Pope, through the Vatican prelates and all the bishops can regulate much of Catholic community life, and some of the regulation is based on the interpretation of Scripture or the application of the traditional interpretation of Scripture. An example of this is the prohibition of abortion. The Church has accepted in a fundamentally modified form most of the legitimate modern [[Historical-critical method (Higher criticism)|Higher Critical methodology]] of studying Scripture, including the [[Documentary Hypothesis]] of origins first developed within German Protestantism. But the effects of this on the tenets of the Christian Faith are profoundly mitigated due to the creedal affirmations of the Church developed centuries ago and to the [[discernment]] of Papal authority. Thus the Roman Catholic Church does not waver on the Deity of Christ, the Trinity, the death and resurrection of Christ, and the Second Coming. | + | The Roman Catholic Church, like the Orthodox Churches, has a strong sense of the Authority ([[Magisterium]]) given to the Bishops by Christ to teach, interpret, and defend the Faith and therefore to exercise the responsibility to interpret to the Faithful both Holy Scripture and Apostolic Tradition. But since [[Vatican II]], there has been an increased effort to bring Scriptural knowledge to the laity, and now there has been an increase of Scripture reading and study programs throughout most sections of the Church. This has been abetted by the Catholic Charismatic movement which has had the effect of promoting individual appropriation of the gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit, and with that, the correlated devotional and intellectual use of Holy Scriptures. However, the role of "Magisterium", that is the Teaching Authority, sets firm limits to individual interpretation. The Roman Catholic church understands that, though Magisterial authority is given to all the bishops, the definitive exercise of the Magisterium is limited to one bishop - the bishop of Rome, the Pope, and to the bishops in communion together with him. Further, Catholicism teaches that the Pope, when he declares dogma (teaching) ''[[Ex cathedra|ex-Cathedra]]'' (from the chair), speaks infallibly (on matters of faith and morals). The first time the Pope promulgated dogma ''ex-cathedra'' formally was to promulgate the doctrine itself of Papal Infallibility, based on Scripture, history, and reason.<ref>[http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum20.htm Papal Encyclicals Online. Decrees of the First Vatican Council]<br/>[http://www.catholic.com/tracts/papal-infallibility Catholic Answers. Papal Infallibility]</ref> The Pope, through the Vatican prelates and all the bishops can regulate much of Catholic community life, and some of the regulation is based on the interpretation of Scripture or the application of the traditional interpretation of Scripture. An example of this is the prohibition of abortion. The Church has accepted in a fundamentally modified form most of the legitimate modern [[Historical-critical method (Higher criticism)|Higher Critical methodology]] of studying Scripture, including the [[Documentary Hypothesis]] of origins first developed within German Protestantism. But the effects of this on the tenets of the Christian Faith are profoundly mitigated due to the creedal affirmations of the Church developed centuries ago and to the [[discernment]] of Papal authority. Thus the Roman Catholic Church does not waver on the Deity of Christ, the Trinity, the death and resurrection of Christ, and the Second Coming. |
| | | | |
| | ==Evangelical Understanding of the History of the Bible== | | ==Evangelical Understanding of the History of the Bible== |