- What Are the Hebrew Bible and Old Testament?
The
writings that make up the Hebrew Bible or Christian Old Testament are
by any reckoning among the most influential writings in Western
history. The idea of sacred Scripture, however, is by no means a
clear one, and it is taken to mean very different things by different
people. Some conservative Christians regard the Bible as the inspired
word of God, verbally inerrant in all its details. Before we can
begin to discuss what it might mean to regard the Bible as Scripture,
there is much that we need to know about it of a more mundane nature.
This material includes the content of the biblical text, the history
of its composition, the literary genres in which it is written, and
the problems and ambiguities that attend its interpretation. It is
the purpose of this book to provide such introductory knowledge. If
the Bible is Scripture, then the idea of Scripture must be formed in
the light of what we actually find in the biblical text.
The
Hebrew Bible and the Old Testament are not quite the same thing. The
Hebrew Bible is a collection of twenty-four
books
in three divisions: the
Law (Torah), the Prophets (Nebi’im), and the Writings (Ketubim),
sometimes referred to by the acronym Tanak . The Torah consists of
five
books:
Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy (traditionally,
the books of Moses). The Prophets are divided into the four
books of the Former Prophets
(Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings; 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings
are each counted as one book) and the four
books of the Latter Prophets
(Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve; the Twelve Minor Prophets
[Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk,
Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi] are counted as one book). The
Writings consist of eleven books: Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of
Songs (or Canticles), Ruth, Lamentations, Qoheleth (or Ecclesiastes),
Esther, Daniel, Ezra- Nehemiah (as one book), and Chronicles (1 and 2
Chronicles as one book). The Christian Old Testament is so called in
contrast to the New Testament, with the implication that the Old
Testament is in some sense superseded by the New. Christianity
has always wrestled with the theological. significance of the Old
Testament. In the second century c.e., Marcion taught that Christians
should reject the Old Testament completely, but he was branded a
heretic. The Old Testament has remained an integral part of the
Christian canon of Scripture. There are significant differences,
however, within the Christian churches as to the books that make up
the Old Testament. The Protestant Old Testament has the same content
as the Hebrew Bible but arranges the books differently. The first
five books are the same but are usually called the Pentateuch rather
than the Torah. Samuel, Kings, EzraNehemiah, and Chronicles are each
counted as two books, and the Minor Prophets as twelve, yielding a
total of thirty-nine books. The Former Prophets are regarded as
historical books and grouped with Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah.
Daniel is counted as a prophetic book. The (Latter) Prophets are
moved to the end of the collection, so as to point forward to the New
Testament. The Roman Catholic canon contains several books that are
not in the Hebrew Bible or the Protestant Old Testament: Tobit,
Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus (or the Wisdom of Jesus,
son of Sirach = Ben Sira), Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah (= Baruch 6), 1
and 2 Maccabees. Furthermore, the books of Daniel and Esther contain
passages that are not found in the Hebrew Bible. In the case of
Daniel, these are the Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three
Young Men, which are inserted in Daniel 3, and the stories of Susanna
and Bel and the Dragon. The Greek Orthodox Church has a still larger
canon, including 1 Esdras (which reproduces the substance of the book
of Ezra and parts of 2 Chronicles and Nehemiah), Psalm 151, the
Prayer of Manasseh, and 3 Maccabees. A fourth book of Maccabees is
included in Greek Bibles but is regarded as an appendix to the canon,
while another book, 2 Esdras, is included as an appendix in the Latin
Vulgate. These books are called Apocrypha (literally, “hidden
away”) in Protestant terminology. Catholics often refer to them as
“deuterocanonical” or “secondarily canonical” books, in
recognition of the fact that they are not found in the Hebrew Bible.
Some Eastern Christian churches have still more extensive canons of
Scripture. The books of Jubilees and 1 Enoch attained canonical
status in the Ethiopian church.
II.
Why Are There Different Canons of Scripture?
By
“canon” we mean here simply the list of books included in the
various Bibles. Strictly speaking, “canon” means “rule” or
“measuring stick.” The word was used in the plural by librarians
and scholars in ancient Alexandria in the Hellenistic period (third
and second centuries b.c.e.) with reference to literary classics,
such as the Greek tragedies, and in Christian theology it came to be
used in the singular for the Scriptures as “the rule of faith,”
from the fourth century c.e. on. In its theological use, canon is a
Christian concept, and it is anachronistic in the context of ancient
Judaism or even of earliest Christianity. In common parlance,
however, “canon” has come to mean simply the corpus of
Scriptures, which, as we have seen, varies among the Christian
churches. The differences between the various canons can be traced
back to the differences between the Scriptures that became the Hebrew
Bible and the larger collection that circulated in Greek. The Hebrew
Bible took shape over several hundred years and attained its final
form only in the first century c.e. The Torah was the earliest part
to crystallize. It is often associated with the work of Ezra in the
fifth century b.c.e. It may have been substantially complete a
century before that, at the end of the Babylonian exile (586–539
b.c.e.), but there may have also been some additions or modifications
after the time of Ezra. The Hebrew collection of the Prophets seems
to have been formed before the second century b.c.e. We find
references to the Torah and the Prophets as authoritative Scriptures
in the second century b.c.e., in the book of Ben Sira
(Ecclesiasticus) and again in the Dead Sea
III.
The Manuscript, Text and Codex of the Bible:
Manuscript (mss):
Not
only did the list of books that make up the Bible take shape
gradually over time, but so did the words that make up the biblical
text. Modern English translations of the Bible are based on the
printed editions of the Hebrew Bible and the principal ancient
translations (especially Greek and Latin). These printed editions are
themselves based on ancient manuscripts. In the case of the Hebrew
Bible, the most important manuscripts date from the tenth and
eleventh centuries c.e., almost a thousand years after the canon, or
list of contents, of the Hebrew Bible was fixed.
Text:
The
text found in these manuscripts is known as the Masoretic text, or
MT. The name comes from an Aramaic word meaning to transmit or hand
down. The Masoretes were the transmitters of the text. What is called
the Masoretic text, however, is the form of the text that was
established by the Ben Asher family of Masoretes in Tiberias in
Galilee.
Codex:
Masoretic
text is found in the Aleppo
Codex,
which dates from the early tenth century c.e. This codex was kept for
centuries by the Jewish community in Aleppo in Syria. About a quarter
of it, including the Torah, was lost in a fire in 1948. It is now in
Jerusalem. The Pentateuch is preserved in a tenth-century codex from
Cairo. Codex
Leningrad B19A
from the eleventh century is the single most complete source of all
the biblical books in the Ben Asher tradition. It is known to have
been corrected according to a Ben Asher manuscript. The
Cairo Codex
of the Prophets dates from 896 c.e., and a few other manuscripts are
from the tenth century. These manuscripts are our oldest witnesses to
the vowels of most of the Hebrew text. In antiquity, Hebrew was
written without vowels. The Masoretes introduced the vowels as
pointing or marks above and below the letters, as part of their
effort to fix the text exactly. There are fragments of vocalized
texts from the sixth or perhaps the fifth century c.e. Besides the
Tiberian tradition of vocalization, represented by the Ben Asher
family, there was also Babylonian tradition, associated with the
family of Ben Naphtali. The first printed Hebrew Bibles appeared in
the late fifteenth century c.e. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls
in caves near Qumran south of Jericho, beginning in 1947, brought to
light manuscripts of biblical books more than a thousand years older
than the Aleppo Codex.
Fragments
of about two hundred biblical scrolls were found in the caves near
Qumran. Most of the fragments are small, but the great Isaiah Scroll,
1QIsaa, contains the whole book. This scroll dates from about 100
b.c.e.; the oldest biblical scrolls from Qumran are as old as the
third century b.c.e. Most of the scrolls contained only one biblical
book, but three Torah scrolls contained two consecutive books. The
Twelve Minor Prophets were contained in one scroll. Many of these
texts are in substantial agreement with the text copied by the
Masoretes a thousand years later. But the Scrolls also contain other
forms of biblical texts. Several biblical texts, including an
important copy of the book of Exodus (4QpaleoExodm), are closer to
the form of the text preserved in the Samaritan tradition. (The
Samaritan text is often longer than the MT, because it adds sentences
or phrases based on other parallel biblical passages, or adds a
statement to indicate the fulfillment of a command that has been
described.) Moreover, the text of some other biblical books is very
similar to that presupposed in the ancient Greek translation (LXX).
Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, our oldest copies of
Old Testament texts were found in Greek translations. There are
fragments of Greek biblical manuscripts from the second century
b.c.e. on. The oldest complete manuscripts date from the fourth
century c.e. These are Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus. Another
important manuscript, Codex Alexandrinus, dates from the fifth
century. These manuscripts are known as uncials and are written in
Greek capital letters. The Greek translations of biblical books were
generally very literal and reflected the Hebrew text closely.
Nonetheless, in many cases the LXX differed significantly from the
MT. For example, the books of Jeremiah and Job are much shorter in
the Greek than in the Hebrew. The order of chapters in Jeremiah also
differs from that of the MT. In 1 Samuel 16–18, the story of David
and Goliath is much shorter in the LXX. In Daniel 4–6 the LXX has a
very different text from that found in the MT. New light was shed on
some of these cases by the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Scrolls contain
Hebrew texts of Jeremiah that are very close to what is presupposed
in the LXX. (Other copies of Jeremiah at Qumran agree with the MT;
both forms of the text were in circulation.) It now seems likely that
the differences between the Greek and the Hebrew texts were not due
to the translators but reflect the fact that the Greek was based on a
shorter Hebrew text. This is also true in 1 Samuel 16–18 and in a
number of other cases. Not all differences between the LXX and the MT
are illuminated by the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Scrolls do not contain a
short text of Job or a deviant text of Daniel 4–6 such as that
found in the LXX. Nonetheless, the assumption must now be that the
Greek translators faithfully reflect the Hebrew they had before them.
This means that there were different forms of the Hebrew text in
circulation in the third, second, and first centuries b.c.e. Indeed,
different forms of the text of some books are preserved in the Dead
Sea Scrolls. In some cases, the LXX may preserve an older form of the
text than the MT. For example, the shorter form of Jeremiah is likely
to be older than the form preserved in the Hebrew Bible. What this
discussion shows is that it makes little sense to speak of verbal
inerrancy or the like in connection with the biblical text. In many
cases we cannot be sure what the exact words of the Bible should be.
Indeed, it is open to question whether we should speak of the
biblical text at all; in some cases, we may have to accept the fact
that we have more than one form of the text and that we cannot choose
between them. This is not to say that the wording of the Bible is
unreliable. The Dead Sea Scrolls have shown that there is, on the
whole, an amazing degree of continuity in the way the text has been
copied over thousands of years. But even a casual comparison of a few
current English Bibles (say the New Revised Standard Version, the New
English Bible, and the Living Bible) should make clear that there are
many areas of uncertainty in the biblical text. Of course,
translations also involve interpretation, and interpretation adds to
the uncertainty. For the present, however, I only want to make the
point that we do not have one perfect copy of the original text, if
such a thing ever existed. We only have copies made centuries after
the books were originally composed, and these copies often differ
among themselves.