Net2004

why are they NOT the same?
was there a time when the jews had same number of books as the christian canon?
what criterion did the jews use to include and exclude the books from thier canon? what is the earliest known canon of the jews and what books does it have?

one more question

does the new testament make use of jewish writings NOT found in the jewish tanakh?

sotto voce

It needs to be understood that a canon or 'rule' is whatever one wants it to be. There is no human authority to define a divine canon. Each individual must make up his or her own mind. It is not claimed that deity has ever defined it; though Jesus made specific reference to books that referred to him that were commonly agreed to be authoritative. These were presumably the books, no more, no fewer, recognised by the religious establishment of Jerusalem. There was no known dispute on canonical matters then, only on interpretation of agreed canon.

But it also needs to be understood that the generally agreed Christian canon is Jewish. It needs to be realised that all who call themselves Jews also claim to be Christians.

The first Christians, who had all claimed to be of the inheritance of Abraham, Jacob (Israel) and David, all 'Jewish', claimed to be the only true Jews, the only true Israelites— as all Christians do today. If Jesus was the Messiah, the Christ, the only 'Judaism' possible is Christianity. If Jesus was not the Messiah, the Christ, the only canon is the Tanakh— if there is a canon of this heritage at all (and one might very well suppose that, after 2600 years of prophetic silence, there isn't a heritage). Those who have not agreed that Jesus was the Messiah have of course never added the books of the NT to their canon.

It may be useful to remember that the word 'Jewish' is derived from Judah, and not a fundamentally meaningful word. It is brandished around today as if it was, and by many more people than those who claim to be Jews. Supposed atheists often seem very keen to emphasis the importance of Jewishness. This apparently strange phenomenon seems to occur because Judaism is these days associated not with a Messiah, but with keeping of Mosaic Law, that is, as the gospels reveal, much easier to keep than the 'law' required by Christianity. So there seems to be an attempt to present Christianity as outward respectability, and actually morally lax. Scholarship needs to be aware of this distortion, and look instead for authenticity in theological links with Abraham, not Judah.

That which seemed to them to be consistent with and representative of the heritage of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Israel); that which seemed to them to be consistent with and representative of the the establishment of the nation of Israel; and that which seemed to them divinely, rather than humanly, inspired.

It's impossible to state with absolute certainty what people agreed upon, and there may well have been minor disputes. However, the books found in the Protestant canon as defined by all Protestant denominations, and not disputed by Christians (who, in effect, control that aspect of denominations) is likely to be the canon that Jesus recognised. It is also the canon used by those calling themselves Jews who do not recognise Jesus as the Messiah.

Yes. This does not imply that such writings were or are treated as canonical, though.

Net2004

I found the following on debunking christianity by a hector avolos

quote:
“Sometimes Jesus quotes from sources not regarded as scripture today. Consider the passage where Jesus explains the purpose of parables in Mark 4:12: “So that they may indeed see but not perceive, and may indeed hear but not understand; lest they should turn again, and be forgiven” (RSV). This is an allusion to Isaiah 6:9-10. If one looks at the Hebrew Bible, one will not find the final words (“and be [they] forgiven”) but rather “and (let there be) healing for him” (wrp’ lw). The Septuagint has “I shall heal them” (kai iasomai autous). The words “and be they forgiven” (yštbyq lhwn), however, are found in the Aramaic Targum of Isaiah.”


the aramaic targum of isaiah was an interpretation? did these targums exist in jesus' time? was jesus a pick and choose christian who choose what he liked from the targums? did the pharisees consider the targums to be at the same level as the torah?

Net2004

i did a simple google search and found out the the christian canon has books which the jewish canon lacks. what is the reason behind that?

sotto voce

In the perspective of Jesus, was there a difference between healing and forgiveness?

People do love to debunk themselves, one way and another.

Net2004

your religion is younger than the books in the jewish tanakh. what canon did the pharisees recognise?

sotto voce

It needs to be understood that the generally agreed Christian canon is Jewish.

Net2004

was your jesus like the christians who created the protestant canon ? was he a pick and choose christian?

Net2004

how many books do the jews have in thier canon? why do they reject the books in the christian ot?

sotto voce

Am I God?

This is BC&H.