From: Donald Nield (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Sep 12 2003 - 18:31:28 EDT
gordon brown wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Sep 2003, Donald Nield wrote:
> > It would not surprise me if numerical considerations had some effect on
> > the final form of the OT canon. That there are 5 books in the Torah is
> > probably not an accident. That there are 12 books of the minor prophets
> > suggests some design. With 5 and 12 established, it is not surprising
> > that there might be 12 historical books and 5 books in the major
> > prophets section and 5 wisdom books. The 22 is probably just a
> > consequence of 5+5+12 =22.
> > The four gospels plus Acts forms a group of 5, and it is likely that the
> > early church saw this group as analogous to the Torah. That leaves 22
> > other NT books. That may be a coincidence -- not improbable.
> > Don Nield
> The above is based on our Old Testament organization, which in turn is
> taken from the Septuagint. The Hebrew Bible is organized much differently.
> The order of the books is substantially different, and in some cases what
> we consider to be two books is just one.
> Gordon Brown
> Department of Mathematics
> University of Colorado
> Boulder, CO 80309-0395
Thanks to Gordon. I already knew what Gordon has just written, and I should
have made this clear in my message. But my intention was to respond to Richard
on his own ground. I know for example that 1 & 2 Kings is really one book, and
that it is forcing things to regard Ruth and Esther as history and
Lamentations as part of the major prophets, instead of as part the Hebrew
Writings. But what Richard is doing is making deductions from the the modern
form of the canon, so I have started from there myself.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 12 2003 - 18:33:46 EDT