High places in old testament

D. Melito, Bishop of Sardis (c. A sudden change is improbable. The Spirit of God might and did breathe into later writings, and the presence of the deuterocanonical books in the Church's Canon at once forestalls and answers those Protestant theologians of a preceding generation who claimed that Esdras was a Divine agent for an inviolable fixing and sealing of the Old Testament. St. The full realization of this truth came slowly, at least in the Orient, where there are indications that in certain quarters the spell of Palestinian-Jewish tradition was not fully cast off for some time. Hippolytus (d. 90) has reasonably been taken as having terminated the disputes between rival rabbinic schools concerning the canonicity of Canticles. To the second century A. The ancient Greek Old Testament known as the Septuagint was the vehicle which conveyed these additional Scriptures into the Catholic Church. The influence of Origen's and Athanasius's restricted canon naturally spread to the West. Hence it is not surprising that, of late, the assertion was made that this view had long since become an admitted fact in the textual criticism of the Old Testament. These books, he adds, are read in the churches for the edification of the people, and not for the confirmation of revealed doctrine. D. The so-called Council of Jamnia (c. Evang. When difficulties arose, it is said that the witnesses were counted and the question decided according to numerical majority. Jude, quotes explicitly from the "Book of Henoch", long universally recognized as apocryphal, see verse 14, while in verse 9 he borrows from another apocryphal narrative, the "Assumption of Moses". Yet the force of the direct and indirect employment of Old Testament writings by the New is slightly impaired by the disconcerting truth that at least one of the New Testament authors, St. When later the Massoretes speak only of four or five instances, we must say with Ginsburg that these are merely recorded as typical. For a judgment on the Septuagint and its original, the knowledge of the Hebrew writing then in vogue is indispensable. The latter styles them "ecclesiastical" books, but in authority unequal to the other Scriptures. So while the intuitive sense and increasingly reverent consciousness of the faithful element of Israel could, and presumably did, give a general impulse and direction to authority, we must conclude that it was the word of official authority which actually fixed the limits of the Hebrew Canon, and here, broadly speaking, the advanced and conservative exegetes meet on common ground. The term general body of Scribes has been used advisedly; contemporary scholars gravely suspect, when they do not entirely reject, the "Great Synagogue" of rabbinic tradition, and the matter lay outside the jurisdiction of the Sanhedrim. It is more tenable to conclude to a selective process under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, and a process completed so late in Apostolic times that the New Testament fails to reflect its mature result regarding either the number or note of sanctity of the extra-Palestinian books admitted. The argument is not without a certain force; the New Testament undoubtedly shows a preference for the Septuagint; out of the 350 texts from the Old Testament, 300 favour the language of the Greek version rather than that of the Hebrew. Nor is there any reason for supposing, with some early Christian writing essays 12 per page writers, conscious changes or falsifications of the text. Full certainty as to the characters of the Hebrew scrolls of the third-second century B. Cyprian. There is an instance of a Talmudic doctor distinguishing between a composition "given by the wisdom of the Holy Spirit" and one supposed to be the product of merely human wisdom. But there are considerations which bid us hesitate to admit an Apostolic adoption of the Septuagint en bloc. These venerable manuscripts of the Septuagint vary somewhat in their content outside the Palestinian Canon, showing that in Alexandrian-Jewish circles the number of admissible extra books was not sharply determined either by tradition or by authority. The Books of Samuel have been investigated by Wellhausen and Driver; Jeremias by Köhler; Ezechiel by Cornill; Job by Beer; Ecclesiasticus by Peters. The Alexandrian tradition is represented by the weighty authority of Origen. At any rate it dates from the period under examination and comprises all the deuterocanonical books, with IV Machabees besides. We know the Samaritan letters only after the time of Christ. Moreover, it should be remembered that at the beginning of our era, and for some time later, complete sets of any such voluminous collection as the Septuagint in manuscript would be extremely rare; the version must have been current in separate books or groups of books, a condition favourable to a certain variability of compass. The perfect agreement of the manuscripts, even in their critical remarks and seemingly irrelevant and casual peculiarities, has led to the assumption that the present text not only represents a single recension, but that this recension is even built upon one archetype containing the how to write a letter of admission for college very peculiarities that now strike us in the manuscripts. The present state of the Hebrew text is doubtless the outcome of systematic labour during the course of several centuries, but the question is whether the supposed archetype ever existed. There are both psychological and historical reasons against the supposition that the Old Testament canon grew spontaneously by a kind of instinctive public recognition of inspired books. C. Irenæus, always a witness of the first rank, on account of his broad acquaintance with ecclesiastical tradition, vouches that Baruch was deemed on the same footing as Jeremias, and that the narratives of Susanna and Bel and the Dragon were ascribed to Daniel. St. To historically learn the Apostolic Canon of the Old Testament we must interrogate less sacred but later documents, expressing more explicitly the belief of the first ages of Christianity. The Pentateuch plus Josue. Cases are not rare when consideration for religious or moral feeling has led to the substitution of a more harmless euphemism for an ill-sounding word. A letter or a word in the text had, according to the note on the margin, either to be changed, or inserted, or omitted by the reader. C. Hilary of Poitiers and Rufinus followed their footsteps, excluding the deuteros from canonical rank in theory, but admitting them in practice. Obviously, the inferior rank to which the deuteros were relegated by authorities like Origen, Athanasius, and Jerome, was due to too rigid a conception of canonicity, one demanding that a book, to be entitled to this supreme dignity, must be received by all, must have the sanction of Jewish antiquity, and must moreover be adapted not only to edification, but research papers on capital punishment also to the "confirmation of the doctrine of the Church", to borrow Jerome's phrase. This "book of the law" was practically identical with Deuteronomy, and its recognition or canonization consisted in the solemn pact entered into by Josias and the people of Juda, described in 2 Kings 23. Textual criticism was employed by the Massoretes very moderately, and even the little they did, shows that as mush as possible they left untouched all that had been handed down. It is a significant fact that in all these Alexandrian Bibles the traditional Hebrew order is broken up by the interspersion of the additional literature among the other books, outside the law, thus asserting for the extra writings high places in old testament a substantial equality of rank and privilege. This was an era of construction, a turning-point in the history of Israel. St. ) Without being positive on the subject, the advocates of the older views regard it as highly probable that several additions were made to the sacred repertory between the canonization of the Mosaic Torah above described and the Exile (598 B. But as to our distinct concept of canonicity, it is a modern idea, and even the Talmud gives no evidence of it. How did this change take place? But so far as concerns the great majority of the Palestinian Hagiographa--a fortiori, the Pentateuch and Prophets--whatever want of conclusiveness there may be in the New Testament, evidence of their canonical standing is abundantly supplemented from Jewish sources alone, in the series of witnesses beginning with the Mishnah and running back through Josephus and Philo to the translation of the above books for the Hellenist Greeks. Considering the reading of the Bible in the synagogue and the statements of Josephus (Contra Apionem, I, viii) and of Plato ( Eusebius, "Præp. Josephus is the earliest writer who numbers the books of the Jewish Bible. This factor should be considered in weighing a certain argument. The second group of corrections consisted in changing an ambiguous word, — of such eighteen are recorded in the Massorah. The actual publication of the entire Mosaic code, according to the dominant hypothesis, did not how to write a phd thesis uk occur until the days of Esdras, and is narrated in chapters viii-x of the second book bearing that name. Nehemiah 8- 10; 2 Maccabees 2:13, in the Greek original. 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:21). Protocanonical ( protos, "first") is a conventional word denoting those sacred writings which have been always received by Christendom without dispute. The conservative exegetes find a confirmatory argument in a statement of the apocryphal Fourth Book of Esdras (xiv, 18-47), under whose legendary envelope they see an historical truth, and a further one in a reference in the Baba Bathra tract of the Babylonian Talmud to hagiographic activity on the part of "the men of the Great Synagogue", and Esdras and Nehemias. Yet, however persuasive the argument appears at first sight its validity has been constantly impugned by authorities such as Kuenen, Strack, Buhl, König, and others distinguished by their knowledge of the subject. While maintaining the familiar arrangement of the Septuagint, he says that he verified his catalogue by inquiry among Jews; Jewry by that time had everywhere discarded the Alexandrian books, and Melito's Canon consists exclusively of the protocanonicals minus Esther. St. The sixth-century Biblical manuscript known as the "Codex Claromontanus" contains a catalogue to which both Harnack and Zahn assign an Alexandrian origin, about contemporary with Origen. ; another, that of Nablus, to the sixth. ), a contemporary of Esdras. The vowels of the expression to be read are attached to the written word of the text, whilst the consonants are noted on the margin. Well known is the ever-recurring "Qerê" Adonai instead of Jahvê; it seems to date back to the time before Christ, and probably even the first Greek interpreters were acquainted with it. To this extent at least, Catholic writers on the subject dissent from the drift of the Josephus testimony. In his famous "Prologus Galeatus", or Preface to his translation of Samuel and Kings, he declares that everything not Hebrew should be classed with the apocrypha, and explicitly says that Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Tobias, and Judith are not in the Canon. ", VIII, vi) on the treatment of the Scriptures, we may rightly suppose that greater changes of high places in old testament the text did not occur at that time. And while there is what may be called a consensus of Catholic exegetes of the conservative type on an Esdrine or quasi-Esdrine formulation of the canon so far as the existing material permitted it, this agreement is not absolute; Kaulen and Danko, favouring a later completion, are the notable exceptions among the above-mentioned scholars. All the deuteros except Tobias, Judith, and the addition to Esther, are biblically used in the works of these Fathers. Such corrections were of various kinds. But the Catholic Scripturists who admit an Esdrine Canon are far from allowing that Esdras and his colleagues intended to so close up the sacred library as to bar any possible future accessions. ). But for the deuterocanonical literature, only the last testimony speaks as a Jewish confirmation. These consist of seven books: Tobias, Judith, Baruch, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, First and Second Machabees; also certain additions to Esther and Daniel. How the work of the scribes was carried out in detail, we cannot ascertain. Nevertheless Origen employs all the deuterocanonicals as Divine Scriptures, and in his letter of Julius Africanus defends the sacredness of Tobias, Judith, and the fragments of Daniel, at the same time implicitly asserting the autonomy of the Church in fixing the Canon (see references in Cornely). Did it pass through the Samaritan alphabet, which clearly betrays its connection with the Phoenician? He comments on the Susanna chapter, often quotes Wisdom as the work of Solomon, and employs as Sacred Scripture Baruch and the Machabees. C. Only in a partial and restricted way may we speak of a first and second Canon. 170), first drew up a list of the canonical books of the Old Testament. D. Justin Martyr is the first to note that the Church has a set of Old Testament Scriptures different from the Jews', and also the earliest to intimate the principle proclaimed by later writers, namely, the self-sufficiency of the Church in establishing the Canon; its independence of the Synagogue in this respect. The deuterocanonical ( deuteros, "second") are those whose Scriptural character was contested in some quarters, but which long ago gained a secure footing in the Bible of the Catholic Church, though those of the Old Testament are classed by Protestants as the "Apocrypha". Even the word of Jesus in Matthew 5:18, about the jot and tittle not passing away, seem to point to a scrupulous care in the preservation of the very letter; and the unconditional authority of the Scripture presuppose a high opinion of the letter of Holy Writ. However, there are signs that the Greek version was not deemed by its readers as a closed Bible of definite sacredness in all its parts, but that its somewhat variable contents shaded off in the eyes of the Hellenists from the eminently sacred Law down to works of questionable divinity, such as III Machabees. In his Hexaplar edition of the Old Testament all the deuteros find a place. The completion of the Jewish Canon, by the addition of the Prophets and Hagiographa as bodies to the Law, is attributed by conservatives to Esdras, the priest-scribe and religious leader of the period, abetted by Nehemias, the civil governor; or at least to a school of scribes founded by the former. Jerome cast his weighty suffrage on the side unfavourable to the disputed books. high places in old testament Coming down to the next age, that of the apologists, we find Baruch cited by Athenagoras as a prophet. However the case may have been for the Prophets, the preponderance of evidence favours a late period as that in which the Hagiographa were closed, a period when the general body of Scribes dominated Judaism, sitting "in the chair of Moses", and alone having the authority and prestige for such action. ), say the critical exegetes, there was in Israel no written code of laws or other work, universally acknowledged as of supreme and Divine authority. St. In the Talmud no mention has as yet been made of them. But this writing is undoubtedly decorative, displaying care and art, and offers, therefore, no sure basis for a decision. In its present arrangement this contains 40; Josephus arrived at 22 artificially, in order to match the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet, by means of collocations and combinations borrowed in part how to write a mba essay from the Septuagint. They cite especially Isaiah 34:16; 2 Chronicles 29:30; Proverbs 25:1; Daniel 9:2. But though the formal idea of canonicity was wanting among the Jews the fact existed. This argument, in fact, is the pivot of the current system of Pentateuchal criticism, and will be developed more at length in the article on the Pentateuch, as also the thesis attacking the Mosaic authorship and promulgation of the latter as a whole. (Cf. For the period following the Babylonian Exile the conservative argument takes a more confident tone. ) Far more arresting in favour of an Esdrine formulation of the Hebrew Bible is the much-discussed passage from Josephus, "Contra Apionem", I, viii, in which the Jewish historian, writing about A. C. But we are, perhaps, justified in holding that the disputes between help writing a research paper mla the Jews and Christians about the text of the Scriptures were one of the reasons why the former hastened the work of unifying and fixing the text. It should be noticed, however, that the document to which this catalogue was prefixed is capable of being understood as having an anti-Jewish polemical purpose, in which case Melito's restricted canon is explicable on another ground. That a written sacred Torah was previously unknown among the Israelites, is demonstrated by the negative evidence of the earlier prophets, by the absence of any such factor from the religious reform undertaken by Ezechias (Hezekiah), while it was the mainspring of that carried out by Josias, and lastly by the plain surprise and consternation of the latter ruler at the finding of such a work. The present text on the contrary seems to have resulted from the critical labour of the scribes from the first century B. In the case of the Minor Prophets attempts have been made by Vollers to discover the characters employed. A. Still there was presumably a time in which the Sacred Scriptures were written in an ancient form of the Samaritan characters which are closely related with those of the Hasmon an coin inscription. The Septuagint version was the Bible of the Greek-speaking, or Hellenist, Jews, whose intellectual and literary centre was Alexandria (see SEPTUAGINT). D. The oldest extant copies date from the fourth and fifth centuries of our era, and were therefore made by Christian hands; nevertheless scholars generally admit that these faithfully represent the Old Testament as it was current among the Hellenist or Alexandrian Jews in the age immediately preceding Christ. 236) may fairly be considered as representing the primitive Roman tradition. It is not possible that the writing of the fourth century was quite similar to that of the Nash Papyrus or of the first-century inscriptions. In favour of this hypothesis, which, since the time of Olshausen, has been defended and based upon a deeper argument especially by de Lagarde, evidence has been brought forward which seems overwhelming. Influenced, doubtless, by the Alexandrian-Jewish usage of acknowledging in practice the extra writings as sacred while theoretically holding to the narrower Canon of Palestine, his catalogue of the Old Testament Scriptures contains only the protocanonical books, though it follows the order of the Septuagint. The terms protocanonical and deuterocanonical, of frequent usage among Catholic theologians and exegetes, require a word of caution. However simple and imperfect his method was, under the circumstances an high places in old testament objective account of the actual state of the question was much more valuable than a series of hypotheses the claims of which we could not now examine. Has not as yet been obtained. C. A large number of Catholic authorities see a canonization of the deuteros in a supposed wholesale adoption and approval, by the Apostles, of the Greek, and therefore larger, Old Testament. According to Jewish tradition, Esdras brought over the new (Assyrian) writing when returning from the Exile, in which script the Sacred Books were thereafter transcribed. For the West African Church the larger canon has two strong witnesses in Tertullian and St. Such were the so-called "Tiqqunê Sopherîm", corrections of the scribes. An analysis of Jerome's expressions on the deuterocanonicals, in various letters and prefaces, yields the following results: first, he strongly doubted their inspiration; secondly, the fact that he occasionally quotes them, and translated some of them as a concession to ecclesiastical tradition, is an involuntary testimony on his part to the high standing these writings enjoyed in the Church at large, and to the strength of the practical tradition which prescribed their readings in public worship. To characterize a book which held no acknowledged place in the divine library, the rabbis spoke of it as "defiling the help writing a good essay hands", a curious technical expression due probably to the desire to prevent any profane touching of the sacred roll. And an ultimate tribunal was also needed to set its seal upon the miscellaneous and in some cases mystifying literature embraced in the Hagiographa. The New Testament quotations from the Old are in general characterized by a freedom and elasticity regarding manner and source which further tend to diminish their weight as proofs of canonicity. They are not felicitous, and it would be wrong to infer from them that the Church successively possessed two distinct Biblical Canons. Some statements of Jewish tradition suggest that they were satisfied with superficial investigation and criticism, which however, is all that could have been expected at a time when serious textual criticism was not even thought of. (With regard to the employment of apocryphal writings in this age see under APOCRYPHA. So neither a fluctuating Septuagint nor an inexplicit New Testament conveys to us the exact extension of the pre-Christian Bible transmitted by the Apostles to the Primitive Church. They were first of all corrections of real mistakes, whether of letters or of entire words. But there were many pseudo-prophets in the nation, and so some authority was necessary to draw the line between the true and the false prophetical writings. The existing oldest representative manuscripts are not entirely identical in the books they contain. However, aside from the absence of Machabees from the Codex Vaticanus (the very oldest copy of the Greek Old Testament), all the entire manuscripts contain all the deutero writings; where the manuscript Septuagints differ from one another, with the exception noted, it is in a certain excess above the deuterocanonical books. If a reading proved untenable, they did not correct the text itself, but were satisfied with noting the proper reading on the margin as "Qerê" (read), in opposition to "Kethîbh" (written). True, it is quite reasonable to assume that the prophetic office in Israel carried its own credentials, which in a large measure extended to its written compositions. 100, registers his conviction and that of his coreligionists--a conviction presumably based on tradition--that the Scriptures of the Palestinian Hebrews formed a closed and sacred collection from the days of the Persian king, Artaxerxes Longiamanus (465-425 B. St. Though the Old Testament reveals high places in old testament no formal notion of inspiration, the later Jews at least must have possessed the idea (cf. E. Jewish tradition, as illustrated by the already cited Josephus, Baba Bathra, and pseudo-Esdras data, points to authority as the final arbiter of what was Scriptural and what not. (See PENTATEUCH; SAMARITANS. In appreciating his attitude we must remember that Jerome lived long in Palestine, in an environment high places in old testament where everything outside the Jewish Canon was suspect, and that, moreover, he had an excessive veneration for the Hebrew text, the Hebraica veritas as he called it. In this connection must be mentioned the argument from the Samaritan Pentateuch to establish that the Esdrine Canon took in nothing beyond the Hexateuch, i. As remarked above, there are cogent reasons for believing that it was not a fixed quantity at the time. The protocanonical books of the Old Testament correspond with those of the Bible of the Hebrews, and the Old Testament as received by Protestants. Regarding the sources of canonicity among the Hebrew ancients, we are left to surmise an analogy. Until the reign of King Josias, and the epoch-making discovery of "the book of the law" in the Temple (621 B. The Aramaic writing of the fifth century shows an unmistakable tendency towards the latter forms, yet many letters are still closely related to the ancient alphabet: as Bêth, Caph, Mêm, Samech, Ayin, Tasade. The oldest inscription belongs, perhaps, to the fourth century A. ) But that is not all. But its compilers were aware of the "Itturê Sopherîm", or erasures of the connecting Waw, which had been made in several places in opposition to the Septuagint and the Samaritan Versions.