 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > help with john 6 and exegesis | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
Hobbes
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 63
| Posted 6/4/2004 9:10 PM (GMT -6) |   | Larris: After all the Jews during Jesus time had a cannon, that had been copied and recopied and didn't have one original manuscript.
Response: Not so, my dear Larris. The Jewish canon was not closed or defined until about 90AD.
At the time of Jesus, the most comprehensive Bible in Palestine consisted of the five books of the Torah, and the collection of the Prophets. Sometimes a third category was added to these two, the Writings, whose contents were undefined, but contained, at least, most of the books chosen for the later Hebrew bible. However, there were many sects who did not accept the “comprehensive” Bible I speak of. For instance, the Sadducees accepted ONLY the Pentateuch. As the Dead Sea Scrolls indicate, the Essenes had MORE books in addition to those found in the Torah, the Law, and the Writings. In Alexandria, (the Septuagint) the Writings were quite extensive, lacking a formal canon; but when the Bible was printed in Greek, it contained a varying number of books, usually most of what is now in the Apocrypha. To this was added an oral tradition of law, some of which was attributed to Moses.
So at the time of Christ THERE WAS NO UNIVERSALLY RECOGNIZED JEWISH CANON! Evidence points to the completion of the OT canon by a Synod at Jabneh (or Jamnia) between 90 and 100 A.D., (notice the date) where an assembly of rabbis decided on which books were to be regarded as genuine. I must say here that whether this assembly actually took place or not is subject to some dispute. Nevertheless, the Jewish canon was ultimately established by the Pharisees, who dominated Judaism after 70 AD. The Mishnah, compiled by the second century, describes some of the debate that occurred prior to the closing of the canon (specifically, concerning the Writings). Yadaim 3:5 calls attention to the debate over Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes. Megillat Taanit, in a discussion of days when fasting is prohibited but that are not noted in the Bible, mentions the holiday of Purim, which suggests that the book of Esther was not at that time considered canonical. THERE WAS NO CHRISTIAN INPUT AT ALL THROUGHOUT THIS ASSEMBLY! It was ENTIRELY Jewish – more than that, it was ENTIRELY PHARASAICAL! Do we want to trust the very sect that Jesus called the children of the Devil, operating at a time AFTER God’s judgment on Jerusalem in 70 AD, on questions of canonicity?
THIS OT “canon” was accepted by Martin Luther and is what Protestants use today. This is in spite of the fact that early Christians, in general, (there are exceptions) rejected this Jewish Old Testament canon, and continued to use the Septuagint, a Greek version of the Old Testament produced in Alexandria beginning in the third century BC. The Septuagint included several books and additional passages that the rabbis now rejected, (Apocryphal books, Psalm 151 etc) and are no longer found in the standard Jewish editions today. In part their decision was based on the fact that there were no Hebrew originals for this additional material (ironically, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls demonstrated that the rabbis were, in part, mistaken). Also, there are many places where the Septuagint differs significantly from the Hebrew Masoretic Text (the famous virgin/young woman passage in Isaiah is the most well-known). The NT writers, when quoting from the OT, mostly quote the Septuagint, NOT the Hebrew text. Christianity was to continue to use the Septuagint based "Alexandrian Canon" of the OT for another thousand years!
So, during the time of Christ, far from there being canonical harmony, there was quite some disputation among the Jews. That leads to the following question. If there was such uncertainty about the canon, how could Jesus and the Apostles quote Scripture all the time, presuming their audiences would accept it as Scripture? My opinion is that Jesus never quoted a book of the Bible that his audience did not accept. Therefore, when talking to the Pharisees, he would quote from the prophets; when talking to the Sadducees (who only accepted the Pentateuch), he did not. So, for instance, we have Jesus arguing with the Sadducees about the Resurrection of the dead. Which scriptural proof does Christ use? Does he appeal to the book of Wisdom, which they didn't accept? No! He quotes Exodus 3:6 (see Matthew 22:31-32)! And right after this, when the Sadducees ask Him about the greatest Commandment, Christ -- again -- quotes the Pentateuch only, Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18 (see Matthew 22:36-39). On the other hand, when Christ talked to the Pharisees, he quotes Isaiah, which the Pharisees (and not the Sadducees) accepted as inspired -- see Matthew 15:1-9. As I will show below, when speaking to the masses, Jesus quotes “scripture” that no one knows about, or has since been lost. It seems to me that Jesus dealt with whoever he was talking to on their OWN GROUND. He did NOT impose His understanding of what was Scripture and what was not. Note that in John 10:34 he told the Pharisees, “Has it not been written in YOUR Law…” Not “my Law” not “the Law” not “our Law” not “God’s Law” but “YOUR Law.” I think that there is the very real possibility that Jesus was being sarcastic when He parenthetically added, “and the Scripture cannot be broken…” Maybe He was beating the Pharisees at their own game, using what they accepted as scripture. Sarcasm is communicated ENTIRELY by inflection, so we can’t know for sure, because of the lack of inflection in the written word. Or maybe He treated as scripture whatever His hearers believed was scripture. OR --- It has been put forth by some scholars that the “Scripture cannot be broken” statement was added by a later editor/copyist precisely BECAUSE the “your law” statement seems to devalue what was considered by some to be infallible, inerrant Holy Scripture. However, it seems to me that if one has the incredible audacity and hypocrisy to add something to scripture so that one’s doctrine of the inerrancy of scripture is not threatened by Jesus Himself, it would be simpler to change “your Law” to “the Law” as opposed to adding a somewhat contradictory parenthetical statement. Who knows?
Furthermore, New Testament writers also quote from various traditions not found in our Bibles quite freely, and treat them as if they were inspired. For example, Mat. 2:23, "He shall be called a Nazarene," is attributed to words spoken by the prophets, but does not exist in ANY Old Testament text. Other N.T. quotations with unknown sources would be:
1) John 7:38: Here Jesus says, “He who believes in me, AS THE SCRIPTURE SAID, ‘From his innermost being shall flow rivers of living water.’” (Emphasis mine.) What Scripture? That saying does not exist in any scripture that we know of, yet Jesus Himself calls it Scripture.
2) Luke 11:49: Here Jesus says, “For this reason also the wisdom of God said, ‘I will send to them prophets and apostles, and some of them they will kill and some of them they will persecute…” Where is this quote to be found that Jesus says is from the wisdom of God? Nowhere that we know of.
3) James 4:5: “Or do you think that the Scripture speaks to no purpose: “He jealously desires the Spirit which he has made to dwell in us?” Where is this “Scripture” that James is quoting? Nowhere that we know of – most certainly not in the infallible, inerrant Protestant Canon.
The New Testament writers do NOT refer to these canonical books: Song of Solomon, Ecclesiastes and Esther. However, they DO refer to the following passages from the Old Testament Apocrypha:
1) Hebrews 1:3: “Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high” refers to Wisdom of Solomon 7:25-26: “For she is the breath of the power of God, and a pure influence flowing from the glory of the Almighty: therefore can no defiled thing fall into her. For she is the brightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror of the power of God, and the image of his goodness.”
2) Hebrews 11:35ff refers to 2 Maccabees, chapters 6-7. This involves 2 chapters of 2 Maccabees and is too long to reproduce here. If you’re interested, 2 Maccabees can be found at: http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/Kjv2Mac.html
3) James 1:19 refers to Ecclesiasticus 5:11: “Winnow not with every wind, and go not into every way: for so is every sinner proved by a double tongue.”
Most scholars agree that these canonical scriptures reference the apocryphal texts given above. However, one could argue that the references are vague, and the paraphrases are somewhat removed from the texts they supposedly reference, and so do not give any kind of incontrovertible proof that NT writers considered any non-canonical writings to be scripture. That, of course, would be the position of most Protestant theologians. I would not argue with someone who takes that position. I personally believe the NT writers considered the apocrypha as scripture, and apocryphal writings constitute part of the paradigm from which they write, and so the above examples could very well be references even though they are not direct quotes. However, none of anti-apocryphal arguments hold water when it comes to Jude quoting the Book of Enoch. Enoch is quoted as authoritative, the source is explicitly given, and it is a direct quote.
4) Jude 14-15: "In the seventh (generation) from Adam Enoch also prophesied these things, saying: 'Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads, to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners spoke against him'."
First Enoch 1:9: And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones to execute judgment upon all, and to destroy all the ungodly: And to convict all flesh of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed, and of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.
In my opinion, there is convincing proof that Jesus was very familiar with the Book of Enoch, and approved of it. Many of the key concepts used by Christ himself seem directly connected to terms and ideas in the Book of Enoch. Many other church fathers: Tatian (110-172); Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons (115-185); Clement of Alexandria (150-220); Tertullian (160-230); Origen (186-255); Lactantius (260-330); in addition to: Methodius of Philippi, Minucius Felix, Commodianus, and Ambrose of Milan also approved of and supported the Enochian writings. Even Augustine supposed the work to be a genuine one of the patriarch. The history of the Book of Enoch is quite fascinating. If you’re interested, just do a google search on it.
I am looking at a handwritten list, which I made in about 1975 from my own reading of the Bible, of all the books mentioned in Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles that are not in the Bible. I figured that if the Bible quotes other books, then those books are worth looking into. I spent quite some time trying to find them. Unfortunately, most of those books are lost. I would love to read the Chronicles of Nathan the Prophet, (I Chron 29:29) or The Visions of Iddo the Seer (II Chron 12:15), or The Book of Jashar (Joshua 10:13, I Sam 1:18) or The Chronicles of Shemaiah the Prophet (II Chron 12:15). I have 12 books on my list. I have since discovered several more that I missed in 1975. It is conjectured by some scholars that perhaps portions of some of these books ARE incorporated into Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles. The operative word is, “conjectured”. The Bible itself equates those 12+ books, or at least the portions quoted or referred to, with scripture. Are we going to disregard the testimony of the OT writers, who quote AS SCRIPTURE, non-Biblical texts? Not me, Larris.
I’m going to stop now, Larris, because I have done what I complain about you doing! Writing a big long freakin’ post! (Actually, I copied and pasted most of it from a paper I have previously written along with some plagarism thrown in for good measure!) My point is, things are not so defined and simple. It's really QUITE messy! There was NO universally recognized Jewish canon at the time of Christ. And Christ Himself quoted “scripture” that no longer exists.
Perhaps you would ask, “So what are you doing? Denying the Protestant Canon AND arguing for the Apocrypha and other writings as scripture?” The answer is, I accept the Protestant canon as scripture with a few reservations. I DO believe it is corrupted. The most serious problem as far as I’m concerned is interpolated passages. That would be another subject for another time. However, I see no difference between the Protestant Canon and 1 Clement, The Epistle of Barnabas, The Shepard of Hermas, The Book of Enoch, the Apocrypha in general, and MANY other writings (scriptura) that I haven’t mentioned and don’t intend to. My definition of “scripture” is broad, does not necessitate inerrancy or authenticity, and there is a certain relativism from person to person. I have come to that position based on the Bible itself, the historical facts as we know them, and my experience.
- Hobbes
| | Back to Top | | |
 |
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/5/2004 11:38 AM (GMT -6) | | Hobbes: Not so, my dear Larris. The Jewish canon was not closed or defined until about 90AD
Larris, what I meant Hobbes was that they did not have ONE original writing. They didn't even have the ark of the covenant, nor the stone tablets. Regardless of what they had, none of it was the very writing that the prophet wrote. I just meant that what they did have were copies.
Hobbes:John 10:34 he told the Pharisees, “Has it not been written in YOUR Law…” Not “my Law” not “the Law” not “our Law” not “God’s Law” but “YOUR Law.” I think that there is the very real possibility that Jesus was being sarcastic when He parenthetically added, “and the Scripture cannot be broken…” Maybe He was beating the Pharisees at their own game, using what they accepted as scripture. Sarcasm is communicated ENTIRELY by inflection...
Larris: Yes Hobbes I agree that Jesus was being sarcastic. However I differ in exactly what he was being sarcasitc to. I think he was being sarcastic to the Pharisees themselves who claimed to know the scriptures, called it "OUR LAW" many times, and yet misquoted it and left stuff out continually. What Jesus quoted was from the Psalms and was a direct answer to what they had accused him of.
Mat. 10:33 The Jews answered him saying, For a good work we stone thee not: but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
Jesus was atacking their interpretation of the scripture, because they were wanting to atack him physically for "breaking their law" which was "The Law". He is reminding them of something it says in their very own law, that they are forgetting. "Is it not written in YOUR LAW, I said ye are gods? IF he called them gods unto whom the word of God came AND the scripture cannot be broken, Say ye of him whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
Hobbes:The Bible itself equates those 12+ books, or at least the portions quoted or referred to, with scripture. Are we going to disregard the testimony of the OT writers, who quote AS SCRIPTURE, non-Biblical texts? Not me, Larris.
Larris: No Hobbes I don't disregard it, I just don't worry about something that I don't have and can't get. And if I did happen to get any of it, I would compair it closely with what I know to be the truth of the scripture I DO HAVE. No I would not necessarily discount any of it, if it fell into my lap. However I would also not jump over what I do have to just accept it all.
Hobbes: In my opinion, there is convincing proof that Jesus was very familiar with the Book of Enoch, and approved of it. Many of the key concepts used by Christ himself seem directly connected to terms and ideas in the Book of Enoch.
Larris: I also have no problem with that and have read the book of Enoch.
Hobbes: I’m going to stop now, Larris, because I have done what I complain about you doing! Writing a big long freakin’ post! (Actually, I copied and pasted most of it from a paper I have previously written along with some plagarism thrown in for good measure!)
Larris: Ha, ha! sounds good to me.
Hobbes: My point is, things are not so defined and simple. It's really QUITE messy! There was NO universally recognized Jewish canon at the time of Christ. And Christ Himself quoted “scripture” that no longer exists.
I agree, it's just that I'm not quite as worked up about it as you are. However I have other areas I get worked up over. If Christ, quoted scripture that no longer exists, then the important part of it DOSE exist, since he quoted it and we have it.
Here's how I look at it. People can't handle the scripture they have, let alone what they don't have. Regardless of all the messy facts, God was and is able to see to it that we have ENOUGH to come to a fairly accurate knowledge of salvation and his ultimate plans. Jesus said if you continue in MY word, then you are my disciple indeed and you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free. That is really the bottom line, and anyone can do that. You have four basic gospels that tell you what he taught. You have letters from varrious apostles that tell you a little more, and amidst all of that you can find out what you need to know. Jesus is alive and perfectly capable of seeing we get fed the bread of life. Sometimes you just have to slow down and keep it simple.
God bless,
Larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
| 102 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 5:28 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|